do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Joined Cases C-101/19 and C-102/19: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Deutsche Homöopathie-Union (DHU) Arzneimittel GmbH & Co. KG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (References for a preliminary ruling — Medicinal products for human use — Directive 2001/83/EC — Articles 62 and 69 — Particulars on the labelling and package leaflet of homeopathic medicinal products — Exhaustive list of the particulars or possibility to add information that is useful to the patient and is compatible with the summary of product characteristics — Dosage schedules for homeopathic medicinal products)
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer information, homeopathic product, labelling, medicinal product, pharmaceutical legislation, product designation








C_2020230EN.01001002.xml










13.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 230/10






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Deutsche Homöopathie-Union (DHU) Arzneimittel GmbH & Co. KG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland
(Joined Cases C-101/19 and C-102/19) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Medicinal products for human use - Directive 2001/83/EC - Articles 62 and 69 - Particulars on the labelling and package leaflet of homeopathic medicinal products - Exhaustive list of the particulars or possibility to add information that is useful to the patient and is compatible with the summary of product characteristics - Dosage schedules for homeopathic medicinal products)
(2020/C 230/13)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant, appellant and appellant on a point of law: Deutsche Homöopathie-Union (DHU) Arzneimittel GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant, respondent and respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Operative part of the judgment

Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, as modified by Directive 2004/27/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004, must be interpreted as precluding the package leaflet referred to in Article 69 thereof from including information other than that listed in that provision, in particular dosage schedules for homeopathic medicinal products covered by that provision.


(1)  OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.
Case T-20/20: Order of the General Court of 23 April 2020 — Intertranslations (Intertransleïsions) Metafraseis v Parliament
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, damages, financial management, public procurement, right to justice, services contract, tendering, translation








C_2020201EN.01005601.xml










15.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 201/56






Order of the General Court of 23 April 2020 — Intertranslations (Intertransleïsions) Metafraseis v Parliament
(Case T-20/20) (1)

(2020/C 201/73)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 95, 23.3.2020.
Case C-880/19: Order of the President of the Court of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — VZ v Eurowings GmbH
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carrier, indemnification, reservation, traveller








C_2020320EN.01002302.xml










28.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/23






Order of the President of the Court of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — VZ v Eurowings GmbH
(Case C-880/19) (1)

(2020/C 320/51)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/562 of 23 April 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Myanmar/Burma
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Myanmar/Burma, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








L_2020130EN.01002301.xml










24.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 130/23








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/562
of 23 April 2020
         
implementing Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Myanmar/Burma


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 of 2 May 2013 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Myanmar/Burma and repealing Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 (1), and in particular Article 4i thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 2 May 2013, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 401/2013.












(2)


In accordance with Article 4i of Regulation (EU) No 401/2013, the Council has reviewed the list of designated persons and entities set out in Annex IV to that Regulation.












(3)


For one listing, updated information has been received.












(4)


Annex IV to Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex IV to Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.


Article 2
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, 23 April 2020.


For the Council


The President

G. GRLIĆ RADMAN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 121, 3.5.2013, p. 1





ANNEX
Entry 3 in the list of persons and entities set out in Annex IV to Regulation (EU) No 401/2013 is replaced by the following entry:










 


Name


Identifying information


Reasons


Date of listing




‘3.


Than Oo


Date of birth: 12 October 1973
Gender: male
Military identification number: BC 25723


Brigadier General Than Oo was the Commander of the 99th Light Infantry Division of the Myanmar Armed Forces (Tatmadaw) until May 2018. In that context, he is responsible for the atrocities and serious human rights violations committed against the Rohingya population in Rakhine State in the second half of 2017 by the 99th Light Infantry Division. These include unlawful killings, sexual violence and the systematic burning of Rohingya houses and buildings.


25.6.2018’
Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/563 of 23 April 2020 amending Decision 2013/184/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Myanmar/Burma
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Myanmar/Burma, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person




L_2020130EN.01002501.xml










24.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 130/25








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2020/563
of 23 April 2020
         
amending Decision 2013/184/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Myanmar/Burma


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and in particular Article 29 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 22 April 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/184/CFSP (1), concerning restrictive measures against Myanmar/Burma.












(2)


On the basis of a review of Decision 2013/184/CFSP, the restrictive measures should be renewed until 30 April 2021.












(3)


For one listing, updated information has been received.












(4)


Decision 2013/184/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Decision 2013/184/CFSP is amended as follows:






(1)


Article 12 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 12
This Decision shall apply until 30 April 2021. It shall be kept under constant review. It shall be renewed, or amended as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met.’;











(2)


the Annex is amended as set out in the Annex to this Decision.






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




Done at Brussels, 23 April 2020.


For the Council


The President

G. GRLIĆ RADMAN
            





(1)  Council Decision 2013/184/CFSP of 22 April 2013 concerning restrictive measures against Myanmar/Burma and repealing Decision 2010/232/CFSP (OJ L 111, 23.4.2013, p. 75).




ANNEX
Entry 3 in the list of persons and entities set out in the Annex to Decision 2013/184/CFSP is replaced by the following entry:










 


Name


Identifying information


Reasons


Date of listing




‘3.


Than Oo


Date of birth: 12 October 1973
Gender: male
Military identification number: BC 25723


Brigadier General Than Oo was the Commander of the 99th Light Infantry Division of the Myanmar Armed Forces (Tatmadaw) until May 2018. In that context, he is responsible for the atrocities and serious human rights violations committed against the Rohingya population in Rakhine State in the second half of 2017 by the 99th Light Infantry Division. These include unlawful killings, sexual violence and the systematic burning of Rohingya houses and buildings.


25.6.2018’
Case T-252/20: Action brought on 23 April 2020 — JU and Others v Council
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, United Kingdom, equal treatment, fundamental rights, principle of proportionality, withdrawal from the EU








C_2020215EN.01005601.xml










29.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 215/56






Action brought on 23 April 2020 — JU and Others v Council
(Case T-252/20)
(2020/C 215/64)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: JU, JV, JW, JY, JZ, KA, KB (represented by: P. Tridimas, Barrister, A. von Westernhagen, and D. Harrison, Solicitors)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (1), insofar it deprives them without their consent and without due process of their status as Union citizens and their rights arising therefrom;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants claim that by depriving them, of their status of Union citizenship and the fundamental rights arising therefrom, the Council has breached Articles 20 and 23 TFEU, Article 50 TFEU, Articles 39, 40, 45 and 46 as well as Articles 7 and 19 of the Charter, the principles of proportionality, of equal treatment and of legitimate expectations.
Therefore, the applicants claim that Union Citizenship is the fundamental status of EU nationals. As such, it is personal in nature and, once vested, it does not automatically demise upon the withdrawal of the United Kingdom. The applicants allege that no person may be deprived arbitrarily of their Union citizenship status and the rights flowing thereof.


(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, OJ 2020, L 29, p. 1
Case C-169/20: Action brought on 23 April 2020 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: domestic market, free movement of goods, import, import tax, infringement of EU law, law of states, motor vehicle, vehicle tax








C_2020209EN.01001901.xml










22.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/19






Action brought on 23 April 2020 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-169/20)
(2020/C 209/26)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. França and C. Perrin, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that, in not applying depreciation to the environmental component when calculating the value applicable to used vehicles imported into Portuguese territory, purchased in other Member States, in the calculation of registration tax, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










—


order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Portuguese legislation at issue provides for discrimination between the taxation of imported vehicles and the taxation imposed on similar national vehicles. The detailed rules and method of calculation in force almost always result in imported vehicles being taxed more heavily.
That situation is all the more worrying, since it is contrary to the settled case-law of the Court of Justice: the Portuguese legislation on the calculation of the tax applicable to used vehicles purchased in other Member States has already been the subject of previous infringement proceedings and various judgments of the Court of Justice.
The Portuguese legislation does not ensure that the used vehicles imported from other Member States are taxed in an amount not exceeding the tax reflected in similar used national vehicles. This may be explained by the fact that, as a result of the amendment of the legislation in 2016, depreciation is not applied to the environmental component used to calculate the value of a used vehicle.
Accordingly, the depreciation table enacted by the national legislation does not result in a reasonable approximation of the actual value of the used imported vehicle. Consequently, the amount paid to register a used imported vehicle exceeds the amount for a similar used vehicle already registered in Portugal, which constitutes an infringement of Article 110 TFEU and the case-law of the Court of Justice.
Case C-161/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 23 April 2020 — European Commission v Republic of Austria (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2009/147/EC — Conservation of wild birds — Authorisations for spring hunting of male specimens of the bird species ‘Eurasian woodcock’ (Scolopax rusticola) in Lower Austria (Austria) — Article 7(4) and Article 9(1)(c) — ‘No other satisfactory solution’ — Concept of ‘small numbers’)
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Lower Austria, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, bird, hunting, hunting regulations, infringement procedure (EU), protection of animals








C_2020230EN.01001101.xml










13.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 230/11






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 23 April 2020 — European Commission v Republic of Austria
(Case C-161/19) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2009/147/EC - Conservation of wild birds - Authorisations for spring hunting of male specimens of the bird species ‘Eurasian woodcock’ (Scolopax rusticola) in Lower Austria (Austria) - Article 7(4) and Article 9(1)(c) - ‘No other satisfactory solution’ - Concept of ‘small numbers’)
(2020/C 230/14)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes and M. Noll-Ehlers, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Austria (represented by: J. Schmoll, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by authorising the spring hunting of male Eurasian woodcock (Scolopax rusticola) in Lower Austria (Austria), the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(4) of Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds.










2.


Orders the Republic of Austria to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 148, 29.4.2019.
Case C-28/19: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Ryanair Ltd, Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato — Antitrust v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato — Antitrust, Ryanair Ltd, Ryanair DAC (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Transport — Air services — Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 — Article 23(1) — Indication of the final price to be paid — Online passenger check-in fees — VAT — Administrative fees for purchases made by means of a credit card other than that approved by the air carrier — Unavoidable and foreseeable elements of the final price to be paid — Optional price supplements — Concept)
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, air transport, charges for use of infrastructure, electronic money, inland transport, ticket








C_2020230EN.01001001.xml










13.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 230/10






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Ryanair Ltd, Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato — Antitrust v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato — Antitrust, Ryanair Ltd, Ryanair DAC
(Case C-28/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Transport - Air services - Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 - Article 23(1) - Indication of the final price to be paid - Online passenger check-in fees - VAT - Administrative fees for purchases made by means of a credit card other than that approved by the air carrier - Unavoidable and foreseeable elements of the final price to be paid - Optional price supplements - Concept)
(2020/C 230/12)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Ryanair Ltd, Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato — Antitrust

Defendants: Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato — Antitrust, Ryanair Ltd, Ryanair DAC

Operative part of the judgment

Article 23(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community must be interpreted as meaning that passengers’ check-in fees whose payment cannot be avoided because there is no alternative method of checking-in free of charge, the value added tax (VAT) applied to fares for domestic flights, and administrative fees for purchases made by means of a credit card other than that approved by the air carrier constitute price elements that are unavoidable and foreseeable within the meaning of the second sentence of that provision. By contrast, that provision must be interpreted as meaning that passengers’ check-in fees whose payment can be avoided by using a free check-in option and the VAT applied to optional supplements relating to domestic flights constitute an optional price supplement within the meaning of the fourth sentence of that provision.


(1)  OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.
Case C-640/18: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Mons — Belgium) — Wagram Invest SA v Belgian State (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 78/660/EEC — Annual accounts of certain types of companies — Principle that a true and fair view must be given — Acquisition of a financial fixed asset by a public limited company — Entry as a charge, in the profit and loss account, of a discount relating to a non-interest-bearing debt due after one year and entry of the purchase price of the asset as an asset in the balance sheet after deduction of the discount)
Date: 2020-04-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: debt, financial accounting, public limited company, publication of accounts, purchase








C_2020230EN.01000601.xml










13.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 230/6






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 23 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Mons — Belgium) — Wagram Invest SA v Belgian State
(Case C-640/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 78/660/EEC - Annual accounts of certain types of companies - Principle that a true and fair view must be given - Acquisition of a financial fixed asset by a public limited company - Entry as a charge, in the profit and loss account, of a discount relating to a non-interest-bearing debt due after one year and entry of the purchase price of the asset as an asset in the balance sheet after deduction of the discount)
(2020/C 230/06)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d'appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Wagram Invest SA

Defendant: Belgian State

Operative part of the judgment

In the case of the acquisition by a public limited company of a financial fixed asset, for which payment of the price is to be by long-term, interest-free instalments, under conditions similar to those of a loan, the principle of a true and fair view laid down in Article 2(3) of Council Directive 78/660/EEC of 25 July 1978 based on Article [44(2)(g) EC] concerning the annual accounts of certain types of companies, is to be interpreted as not precluding the use of an accounting method which provides for the entry as a charge in the profit and loss account, at the market rate, of a discount relating to a non-interest-bearing debt becoming due after one year relating to that acquisition, and the entry of the purchase price of the fixed asset as an asset in the balance sheet after deduction of that discount.


(1)  OJ C 4, 7.1.2019.