do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-136/20: Action brought on 2 March 2020 — Ardex v EUIPO — Chen (ArtiX PAINTS)
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, painting, paints and varnishes, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020161EN.01004901.xml










11.5.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/49






Action brought on 2 March 2020 — Ardex v EUIPO — Chen (ArtiX PAINTS)
(Case T-136/20)
(2020/C 161/61)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Ardex GmbH (Witten, Germany) (represented by: C. Becker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lian Chen (Seseña Nuevo, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark ArtiX PAINTS — Application for registration No 16 825 614

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 November 2019 in Case R 2503/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of the procedural rules derived from Article 24 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/626;










—


Infringement of the procedural rules derived from Article 7(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;










—


Breach of the principle of the right to a fair hearing;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Commission Decision of 2 March 2020 on public holidays for 2021 2020/C 69/05
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Human Resources and Security, European Commission
Subjects: EU institution, public holiday




C_2020069EN.01000801.xml










3.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 69/8






COMMISSION DECISION
of 2 March 2020
on public holidays for 2021
(2020/C 69/05)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union (CEOS), laid down by Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1), and in particular Article 61 of the Staff Regulations and Articles 16 and 91 of the CEOS,
Having regard to the joint rules establishing the list of public holidays of officials of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 1(3) thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


The list of public holidays in 2021 for staff in Brussels and Luxembourg should be adopted pursuant to Article 61 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and Articles 16 and 91 of the CEOS.










(2)


In 2021, Easter Sunday falls on 4 April.










(3)


In 2021, 23 December falls on a Thursday.










(4)


On 6 November 2019, the Heads of Administration were consulted for their opinion on the list of public holidays for 2021,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1
The public holidays in 2021 for staff in Brussels and Luxembourg are as follows:






1 January


Friday, New Year’s Day




1 April


Maundy Thursday




2 April


Good Friday




5 April


Easter Monday




13 May


Thursday, Ascension Day




14 May


Friday, the day after Ascension Day




24 May


Whit Monday




23 June*


Wednesday, Luxembourg National Holiday
*for staff in Luxembourg




21 July*


Wednesday, Belgian National Holiday
*for staff in Brussels




1 November


Monday, All Saints’ Day




2 November


Tuesday, All Souls’ Day




23 December
to
31 December








Thursday


)
) 7 end-of-year days




Friday


)









TOTAL




17 days







Article 2
Work will resume as normal on Monday 3 January 2022.


Done at Brussels, 2 March 2020.


For the Commission

Johannes HAHN

Member of the Commission





(1)  OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1.

(2)  Consolidated version of the Staff Regulations published by the Commission in January 2003, p. IV-2.
Case C-616/18: Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 2 March 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d'instance Epinal — France) — Cofidis SA v YU, ZT
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil procedure, consumer credit, consumer information, contract terms, limitation of legal proceedings








C_2020304EN.01001301.xml










14.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 304/13






Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 2 March 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d'instance Epinal — France) — Cofidis SA v YU, ZT
(Case C-616/18) (1)

(2020/C 304/15)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 28 February 2020 2020/C 67/01
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2020067EN.01000101.xml










2.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 67/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

28 February 2020
(2020/C 67/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0977 




JPY


Japanese yen


119,36 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4723 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85315 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6738 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0614 




ISK


Iceland króna


139,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,3888 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,390 




HUF


Hungarian forint


337,57 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3259 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8130 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,8348 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6875 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4757 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5550 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7608 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5317 




KRW


South Korean won


1 324,98 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0961 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6662 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4695 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 749,25 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6263 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,027 




RUB


Russian rouble


73,6096 




THB


Thai baht


34,632 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,9232 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,6370 




INR


Indian rupee


79,2850 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-805/19: Order of the President of the Court of 2 March 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Salzburg — Austria) — CT v VINI GmbH
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: paid leave, remuneration of work, termination of employment, working conditions








C_2020320EN.01002202.xml










28.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/22






Order of the President of the Court of 2 March 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Salzburg — Austria) — CT v VINI GmbH
(Case C-805/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/47)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/349 of 2 March 2020 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1916 in respect of operational conditions in certain urban or interurban areas
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: aerodynamics, approval, commercial vehicle, marketing standard, motor vehicle, safety standard, technical specification, technical standard, vehicle parts




L_2020063EN.01000101.xml










3.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 63/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/349
of 2 March 2020
         
amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1916 in respect of operational conditions in certain urban or interurban areas


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Directive 96/53/EC of 25 July 1996 laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic (1), and in particular Article 8b(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Following the adoption of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1916 (2), it has appeared that, in respect of operational conditions in certain urban or interurban areas, its terms were not consistent with Article 8b(3) of Directive 96/53/EC.












(2)


Therefore Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1916 should be amended accordingly.












(3)


This Regulation should enter into force as a matter of urgency on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.












(4)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee referred to in Article 10i(2) of Directive 96/53/EC,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Amendment to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1916

In Article 3, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:


‘1.   Member States may prohibit the circulation of vehicles or vehicle combinations equipped with devices in the in-use position in view of the special characteristics of urban or interurban areas where speed limits are 50 km/h or lessand where vulnerable road users are likely to be present.’.




Article 2

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 March 2020.


For the Commission


The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 235, 17.9.1996, p. 59.

(2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1916 of 15 November 2019 laying down detailed provisions as regards the use of rear aerodynamic devices pursuant to Council Directive 96/53/EC (OJ L 297, 18.11.2019, p. 3).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/375 of 2 March 2020 approving amendments to the specification for a Protected Designation of Origin or a Protected Geographical Indication ‘Priorat/Priorato’ (PDO)
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Catalonia, Spain, designation of origin, fortified wine, labelling, product designation, red wine, rosé wine, white wine








L_2020069EN.01000101.xml










6.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 69/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/375
of 2 March 2020
         
approving amendments to the specification for a Protected Designation of Origin or a Protected Geographical Indication ‘Priorat/Priorato’ (PDO)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 99 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Commission has examined the application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the Protected Designation of Origin ‘Priorat/Priorato’, sent by Spain in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(2)


The Commission has published the application for the approval of the amendments to the specification in the Official Journal of the European Union, as required by Article 97(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 (2).












(3)


No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(4)


The amendments to the specification should therefore be approved in accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Priorat/Priorato’ (PDO) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 March 2020.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(2)  
            OJ C 316, 20.9.2019, p. 10.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/382 of 2 March 2020 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Bergamote(s) de Nancy’ (PGI)
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: France, Grand Est, confectionery product, designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2020072EN.01000101.xml










9.3.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 72/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/382
of 2 March 2020
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Bergamote(s) de Nancy’ (PGI)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined France’s application for these approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Bergamote(s) de Nancy’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (2). These amendments include changing the name ‘Bergamote(s) de Nancy’ to ‘Bergamote de Nancy’/‘Bergamotes de Nancy’.












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Bergamote(s) de Nancy’ (PGI) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 2 March 2020.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 of 12 June 1996 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 (OJ L 148, 21.6.1996, p. 1).

(3)  
            OJ C 361, 25.10.2019, p. 11.
Case T-368/19: Order of the General Court of 2 March 2020 — Datenlotsen Informationssysteme v Commission (State aid — Tax advantages and public financing — Complaint — Decision to open the formal investigation procedure — Action for failure to act — Adoption of a position by the Commission putting an end to the failure to act — Decision to close the formal investigation procedure — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, State aid, control of State aid, infringement of EU law, right to justice, software, tax exemption, tax relief, university








C_2020137EN.01005001.xml










27.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/50






Order of the General Court of 2 March 2020 — Datenlotsen Informationssysteme v Commission
(Case T-368/19) (1)

(State aid - Tax advantages and public financing - Complaint - Decision to open the formal investigation procedure - Action for failure to act - Adoption of a position by the Commission putting an end to the failure to act - Decision to close the formal investigation procedure - No need to adjudicate)
(2020/C 137/78)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Datenlotsen Informationssysteme GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: T. Lübbig, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and K. Blanck, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 265 TFEU seeking a finding that the Commission, following the complaint lodged on 15 March 2012, unlawfully failed, within a reasonable time, to close the formal investigation procedure by adopting a decision under Article 108(2) TFEU or Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 [TFEU] (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by Datenlotsen Informationssysteme GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Case T-138/20: Action brought on 2 March 2020 — PT Ciliandra Perkasa v Commission
Date: 2020-03-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Indonesia, biofuel, countervailing charge, import (EU), originating product, price support, rights of the defence, vegetable oil








C_2020129EN.01002601.xml










20.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/26






Action brought on 2 March 2020 — PT Ciliandra Perkasa v Commission
(Case T-138/20)
(2020/C 129/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: PT Ciliandra Perkasa (West Jakarta, Indonesia) (represented by: F. Graafsma, J. Cornelis and E. Rogiest, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 of 28 November 2019 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia;










—


order the Commission to pay the applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission violated Articles 8(1) and 8(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union (‘basic Regulation’) in determining price undercutting as it failed to examine all the relevant evidence and failed to establish price undercutting for the product as a whole.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission also violated Article 8(5) of the basic Regulation because it based its causation analysis on an erroneous finding of price undercutting.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission committed a manifest error of assessment and breached Article 3 of the basic Regulation in finding, on the one hand, that payments by the Oil Palm Plantation Fund (‘OPPF’) are to be qualified as grants instead of payments for purchases of biodiesel and, on the other hand, that the OPPF payments confer a benefit to biodiesel producers, since the Commission (i) relied on a manifestly erroneous counterfactual and (ii) failed to find that the benefit, if any, was passed through to biodiesel blenders.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Commission committed a manifest error of assessment and breached Article 7 of the basic Regulation in calculating the amount of the benefit under the OPPF scheme.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Commission violated Articles 8(1) and 8(8) of the basic Regulation by failing to base its threat of injury determination on positive evidence and an objective examination of all the relevant factors.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging that the Commission breached the applicant's rights of defense by including certain essential considerations with respect to the undercutting analysis in the Contested Regulation only, thereby depriving the applicant from commenting on this issue.