do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Grant award notice Call for proposals – ref: GP/DSI/ReferNet_FPA/001/20 ReferNet – Cedefop’s European Network of Expertise on Vocational Education and Training (VET) 2020/C 166/04
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: Cedefop
Subjects: Cedefop, Czechia, Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, award of contract, cooperation in the field of education, invitation to tender, vocational training








C_2020166EN.01000701.xml










14.5.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/7






GRANT AWARD NOTICE
CALL FOR PROPOSALS – ref: GP/DSI/ReferNet_FPA/001/20
ReferNet – Cedefop’s European Network of Expertise on Vocational Education and Training (VET)
(2020/C 166/04)
1.   Contracting authority






Cedefop – European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training




attn: Mrs Pascaline Descy




Europe 123




570 01 Thermi (Thessaloniki)




GREECE




Contact point:
Ms Clotilde Assumel-Lurdin
Tel. +30 2310490287
Email: c4t-services@cedefop.europa.eu
Previous publication: OJ C 13, 15.1.2020, p. 16.
2.   Grant award














Beneficiary name


Address


Framework partnership agreement number


Framework partnership agreement duration


Framework partnership agreement signature date


Specific Grant agreement number (2016)


Specific Grant agreement duration


Specific Grant agreement signature date


Grant amount (EUR)




National Pedagogical Institute of the Czech Republic – NPI ČR







Senovážné náměstí 25, 1110 00 Prague,




Czechia






No 2020-FPA4/GP/DSI/ReferNet_FPA/001/20


46 months


23.3.2020


No 2020-0064/GP/DSI/ReferNet_SGA/001/20


10 months


8.4.2020


33 258 




National Organisation for the Certification of Qualifications and Vocational Guidance – EOPPEP







Ethnikis Antistaseos Avenue, 41, 142 34 Nea Ionia Attikis,




Greece






No 2020-FPA2/GP/DSI/ReferNet_FPA/001/20


46 months


23.3.2020


No 2020-0065/GP/DSI/ReferNet_SGA/001/20


10 months


8.4.2020


33 257 




An tSeirbhís Oideachais Leanúnaigh agus Scileanna – SOLAS







Castleforbes House, Dublin 1, DO1 A8NO Dublin,




Ireland






No 2020-FPA1/GP/DSI/ReferNet_FPA/001/20


46 months


2.4.2020


No 2020-0067/GP/DSI/ReferNet_SGA/001/20


10 months


15.4.2020


33 258 




Stichting CINOP – ecbo







Stationplein 14, 5211AP




‘s-Hertogenbosch




Netherlands






No 2020-FPA3/GP/DSI/ReferNet_FPA/001/20


46 months


23.3.2020


No 2020-0063/GP/DSI/ReferNet_SGA/001/20


10 months


8.4.2020


33 257,70
Case C-749/18: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — B and Others v Administration des contributions directes (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 49 and 54 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Tax legislation — Corporate taxes — Parent companies and subsidiaries — Vertical and horizontal tax integration)
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: corporation tax, parent company, right of establishment, subsidiary, tax law








C_2020240EN.01001201.xml










20.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 240/12






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative — Luxembourg) — B and Others v Administration des contributions directes
(Case C-749/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 and 54 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Tax legislation - Corporate taxes - Parent companies and subsidiaries - Vertical and horizontal tax integration)
(2020/C 240/15)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour administrative

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: B and Others

Defendant: Administration des contributions directes

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Articles 49 and 54 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State which, while allowing vertical tax integration between a resident parent company or a permanent establishment, in that Member State, of a non-resident parent company and its resident subsidiaries, does not allow horizontal tax integration between the resident subsidiaries of a non-resident parent company;










2.


Articles 49 and 54 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State which has the effect of compelling a parent company established in another Member State to dissolve an existing vertical tax integration between one of its subsidiaries and a certain number of its resident sub-subsidiaries in order to allow that subsidiary to undertake a horizontal tax integration with other resident subsidiaries of that parent company, even though the resident integrating subsidiary remains the same and dissolution of the vertical tax integration before the end of the minimum duration of the integration, laid down by the national legislation, entails the individual correcting taxation of the companies concerned;










3.


The principles of equivalence and effectiveness must be interpreted as not precluding the legislation of a Member State relating to a tax integration scheme which provides that any request to benefit from such a scheme must necessarily be submitted to the competent authority before the end of the first tax year for which application of that scheme is sought.






(1)  OJ C 93, 11.3.2019.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/673 of 14 May 2020 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Tomate La Cañada’ (PGI)
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Andalusia, Spain, designation of origin, fruit vegetable, labelling, product designation








L_2020158EN.01000201.xml










20.5.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 158/2








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/673
of 14 May 2020
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Tomate La Cañada’ (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 Spain’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Tomate La Cañada’, registered under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 487/2012 (2).












(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 ‘Tomate La Cañada’ (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, 14 May 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 Implementing Regulation (EU) No 487/2012 of 7 June 2012 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Tomate La Cañada (IGP)) (OJ L 150, 9.6.2012, p. 66).

(3)  
            OJ C 431, 23.12.2019, p. 20.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/652 of 14 May 2020 amending Decision 2014/219/CFSP on the European Union CSDP Mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali)
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU police mission, Mali, Sahel, paramilitary force, peacekeeping








L_2020153EN.01000501.xml










15.5.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 153/5








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2020/652
of 14 May 2020
         
amending Decision 2014/219/CFSP on the European Union CSDP Mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and in particular Articles 42(4) and 43(2) thereof,


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 15 April 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/219/CFSP (1) on the European Union CSDP Mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali).












(2)


On 25 June 2018, in its conclusions on Sahel/Mali, the Council underlined the importance of the regionalisation of CSDP in the Sahel with the aim of strengthening, as appropriate, the civilian and military support to cross-border cooperation, the regional cooperation structures – in particular those of the G5 Sahel – and the capacity and ownership of the G5 countries to address the security challenges in the region.












(3)


On 18 February 2019, the Council approved a joint civil-military Concept of Operations on Regionalisation of CSDP action in the Sahel.












(4)


On 21 February 2019, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2019/312 (2), extending EUCAP Sahel Mali and providing it with a financial reference amount until 14 January 2021.












(5)


On 17 March 2020, the Political and Security Committee amended the Operations Plan for EUCAP Sahel Mali and agreed that resources provided to it for the regionalisation of CSDP action in the Sahel should be increased.












(6)


Decision 2014/219/CFSP should be amended accordingly.












(7)


EUCAP Sahel Mali will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union’s external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 14(1) of Decision 2014/219/CFSP, the sixth and seventh paragraphs are replaced by the following:


                  ‘The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP Sahel Mali between 1 March 2019 and 14 January 2021 shall be EUR 69 650 000.’.



Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 14 May 2020.


For the Council


The President

G. GRLIĆ RADMAN
            





(1)  Council Decision 2014/219/CFSP of 15 April 2014 on the European Union CSDP mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (OJ L 113, 16.4.2014, p. 21).

(2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/312 of 21 February 2019 amending and extending Decision 2014/219/CFSP on the European Union CSDP Mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) (OJ L 51, 22.2.2019, p. 29).
Case C-208/19: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Graz — Austria) — NK v MS, AS (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Consumer protection — Consumer rights — Directive 2011/83/EU — Scope — Article 3(3)(f) — Concept of ‘contracts for the construction of new buildings’ — Article 16(c) — Concept of ‘goods made to the consumer’s specifications or clearly personalised’ — Contract between an architect and a consumer concerning the drawing up of a plan for a new single-family house)
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: architecture, building industry, consumer protection, single-family housing, termination of a contract, town-planning profession








C_2020240EN.01002102.xml










20.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 240/21






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Graz — Austria) — NK v MS, AS
(Case C-208/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Consumer rights - Directive 2011/83/EU - Scope - Article 3(3)(f) - Concept of ‘contracts for the construction of new buildings’ - Article 16(c) - Concept of ‘goods made to the consumer’s specifications or clearly personalised’ - Contract between an architect and a consumer concerning the drawing up of a plan for a new single-family house)
(2020/C 240/28)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Graz

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: NK

Defendants: MS, AS

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 3(3)(f) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council must be interpreted as meaning that a contract between an architect and a consumer, according to which the former commits to establishing only, for the latter, a project for the construction of a single-family house and, in that context, to preparing plans, is not a contract for the construction of a new building, within the meaning of that provision.










2.


Article 2(3) and (4) and Article 16(c) of Directive 2011/83 must be interpreted as meaning that a contract between an architect and a consumer, according to which the former commits to establishing for the latter, in accordance with the latter’s specifications and wishes, a project for the construction of a single-family house and, in that context, to preparing plans, is not a contract for the supply of goods made to the consumer’s specifications or clearly personalised, within the meaning of that provision.






(1)  OJ C 172, 20.5.2019
Case C-266/19: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — EIS GmbH v TO (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Consumer protection — Directive 2011/83/EU — Article 6(1)(c) and (h), and Article 6(4) — Annex I.A — Right of withdrawal — Information to be provided by traders in relation to the conditions, time limit and procedures for exercising the right of withdrawal — Obligation for traders to provide a telephone number ‘where available’ — Scope)
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet site, consumer information, contract terms, distance selling, telephone, termination of a contract








C_2020240EN.01002401.xml










20.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 240/24






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — EIS GmbH v TO
(Case C-266/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 2011/83/EU - Article 6(1)(c) and (h), and Article 6(4) - Annex I.A - Right of withdrawal - Information to be provided by traders in relation to the conditions, time limit and procedures for exercising the right of withdrawal - Obligation for traders to provide a telephone number ‘where available’ - Scope)
(2020/C 240/32)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties in the main proceedings


Applicant: EIS GmbH

Defendant: TO

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(1)(c) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation where a trader’s telephone number appears on his or her website, in such a way that it suggests, in the eyes of the average consumer, namely a reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect consumer, that that trader uses that telephone number in his or her contacts with consumers, that telephone number must be regarded as being ‘available’, within the meaning of that provision. In such a case, Article 6 (1)(c) and (h), as well as Article 6(4) of that directive, read in conjunction with Annex I.A thereto, must be interpreted as meaning that a trader who provides the consumer, before the latter is bound by a distance or off-premises contract, with the information relating to the procedures for exercising the right of withdrawal using the model instructions set out in Annex I.A, is required to mention the same telephone number so as to allow that consumer to communicate to the trader any decision to exercise that right using that telephone number.


(1)  OJ C 230, 8.7.2019.