do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-238/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 5 June 2020 — SIA ‘Sātiņi-S’ v Dabas aizsardzības pārvalde
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aquaculture, bird, control of State aid, financial aid, fishing industry, loss, ownership, protected species, protection of animal life








C_2020262EN.01001901.xml










10.8.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 5 June 2020 — SIA ‘Sātiņi-S’ v Dabas aizsardzības pārvalde
(Case C-238/20)
(2020/C 262/25)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa (Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SIA ‘Sātiņi-S’

Defendant: Dabas aizsardzības pārvalde

Questions referred







1.


Does the right to fair compensation for limits on the right to property that is guaranteed by Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union allow the compensation awarded by a State for the losses caused to aquaculture in a Natura 2000 network area by protected birds, in accordance with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, to be significantly less than the losses actually suffered?










2.


Does the compensation awarded by a State for the losses caused to aquaculture in a Natura 2000 network area by protected birds, in accordance with Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, constitute State aid within the meaning of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?










3.


If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, is the de minimis aid limit of EUR 30 000 laid down in Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 717/2014 of 27 June 2014 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector (2) applicable to compensation such as that at issue in the dispute in the main proceedings?






(1)  OJ 2010 L 20, p. 7.

(2)  OJ 2014 L 190, p. 45.
Case C-235/20 P: Appeal brought on 5 June 2020 by ViaSat, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 March 2020 in Case T-734/17, ViaSat v Commission
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to EU information, invitation to tender, satellite communications, tendering, trans-European network, transmission network








C_2021009EN.01000401.xml










11.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/4






Appeal brought on 5 June 2020 by ViaSat, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 26 March 2020 in Case T-734/17, ViaSat v Commission
(Case C-235/20 P)
(2021/C 9/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: ViaSat, Inc. (represented by: P. de Bandt, avocat, M. R. Gherghinaru, avocate, J. Ruiz Calzado, abogado, L. Marco Perpiñà, abogada)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Inmarsat Ventures Ltd

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present appeal admissible and well-founded and, consequently,










—


set aside the judgment under appeal and give a final judgment in this case ordering the Commission to provide the access to the documents requested,










—


annul the decision of the Secretary-General of the Commission of 11 January 2018;










—


order the Commission to pay the appellant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

First plea in law: error in law regarding the application of a general presumption of confidentiality to the requested documents and violation of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 (1) relating to the protection of commercial interests and of the duty to state reasons.
Second plea in law: Error in law regarding the existence of an overriding public interest in disclosure and violation of the last clause of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 relating to the protection of commercial interests.


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001, L 145, p. 43).
Case T-351/20: Action brought on 5 June 2020 — St. Hippolyt v EUIPO — Raisioaqua (Vital like nature)
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, animal feedingstuffs, cereals, foodstuff, fresh fruit, fresh vegetable, horticulture, registered trade mark, seed, trade-mark law








C_2020247EN.01004701.xml










27.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 247/47






Action brought on 5 June 2020 — St. Hippolyt v EUIPO — Raisioaqua (Vital like nature)
(Case T-351/20)
(2020/C 247/65)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH (Dielheim, Deutschland) (represented by M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Raisioaqua Oy (Raisio, Finland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union trade mark ‘Vital like nature’ — Application No 17 165 002

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 March 2020 in Case R 1279/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Art. 60(1)(a) read in conjunction with Art. 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Information from the Commission concerning the non-application of certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698 by Austria COVID-19 outbreak (Regulation (EU) 2020/698 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 laying down specific and temporary measures in view of the COVID-19 outbreak concerning the renewal or extension of certain certificates, licences and authorisations and the postponement of certain periodic checks and periodic training in certain areas of transport legislation (OJ L 165, 27.5.2020, p. 10)) 2020/C 189/06
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Austria, drivers, epidemic, infectious disease, rail transport, road transport, speed control, transport regulations, transport safety








C_2020189EN.01000601.xml










5.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/6






Information from the Commission concerning the non-application of certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698 by Austria
COVID-19 outbreak


(Regulation (EU) 2020/698 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 laying down specific and temporary measures in view of the COVID-19 outbreak concerning the renewal or extension of certain certificates, licences and authorisations and the postponement of certain periodic checks and periodic training in certain areas of transport legislation (OJ L 165, 27.5.2020, p. 10))


(2020/C 189/06)

Notification by: Austria
In conformity with the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698, Austria informed the Commission on 3 June 2020 that it has decided not to apply certain provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2020/698.

Provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698 that Austria has decided not to apply:







—


Article 4(1) concerning the regular inspections of tachographs in road transport under Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1);










—


Article 4(2) concerning the renewal of driver cards under Regulation (EU) No 165/2014;










—


Article 4(3) concerning the replacement of driver cards under Regulation (EU) No 165/2014;










—


Article 11(1) concerning the renewal of licences of train drivers under Directive 2007/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2);










—


Article 11(2) concerning the completion of periodic checks of train drivers under Directive 2007/59/EC.






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on tachographs in road transport, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 1).

(2)  Directive 2007/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the certification of train drivers operating locomotives and trains on the railway system in the Community (OJ L 315, 3.12.2007, p. 51).
Information from the Commission concerning the non-application of certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698 by Greece COVID-19 outbreak (Regulation (EU) 2020/698 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 laying down specific and temporary measures in view of the COVID-19 outbreak concerning the renewal or extension of certain certificates, licences and authorisations and the postponement of certain periodic checks and periodic training in certain areas of transport legislation (OJ L 165, 27.5.2020, p. 10)) 2020/C 189/03
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Greece, commercial vehicle, epidemic, infectious disease, motor vehicle, road safety, roadworthiness tests, technical regulations








C_2020189EN.01000301.xml










5.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/3






Information from the Commission concerning the non-application of certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698 by Greece
COVID-19 outbreak


(Regulation (EU) 2020/698 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 laying down specific and temporary measures in view of the COVID-19 outbreak concerning the renewal or extension of certain certificates, licences and authorisations and the postponement of certain periodic checks and periodic training in certain areas of transport legislation (OJ L 165, 27.5.2020, p. 10))


(2020/C 189/03)

Notification by: Greece
In conformity with the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698, Greece informed the Commission on 3 June 2020 that it has decided not to apply certain provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2020/698.

Provisions of Regulation (EU) 2020/698 that Greece has decided not to apply:







—


Article 5(1) concerning the time limits for the periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers under Directive 2014/45/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (1);










—


Article 5(2) concerning the validity of roadworthiness certificates under Directive 2014/45/EU.






(1)  Directive 2014/45/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers and repealing Directive 2009/40/EC (OJ L 127, 29.4.2014, p. 51).
Case C-239/20 P: Appeal brought on 5 June 2020 by Giorgio Armani SpA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 26 March 2020 in Case T-653/18, Armani v EUIPO
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, fancy leather goods and glove-making industry, footwear industry, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020390EN.01001702.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/17






Appeal brought on 5 June 2020 by Giorgio Armani SpA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 26 March 2020 in Case T-653/18, Armani v EUIPO
(Case C-239/20 P)
(2020/C 390/25)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Giorgio Armani SpA (represented by: S. Martínez-Almeida y Alejos-Pita, abogada)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 30 September 2020, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.
Case C-243/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Polymeles Protodikeio Αthinon (Greece) lodged on 5 June 2020 — DP, SG v Trapeza Peiraios AE
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, national implementing measure, unfair terms of contract








C_2020271EN.01002901.xml










17.8.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/29






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Polymeles Protodikeio Αthinon (Greece) lodged on 5 June 2020 — DP, SG v Trapeza Peiraios AE
(Case C-243/20)
(2020/C 271/37)
Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Polymeles Protodikeio Αthinon

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: DP
SG

Defendant: Trapeza Peiraios AE

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 8 of Directive 93/13/ΕEC, (1) which provides that the Member States may adopt more stringent provisions to ensure a greater degree of protection for the consumer, to be interpreted as meaning that a Member State need not transpose Article 1(2) of Directive 93/13/ΕEC into national law and may allow judicial review also of terms which reflect statutory or regulatory provisions of mandatory or non-mandatory law?










2.


Can the first and second subparagraphs of Article 1(2) of Directive 93/13/EEC, even though not expressly transposed into Greek law, be regarded as having been transposed indirectly together with the content of Article 3(1) and Article 4(1) of that directive, as transposed in Article [2(6)] of Law 225[1]/1994?










3.


Is the exclusion in the first and second subparagraphs of Article 1(2) of Directive 93/13/EEC contained in the concept and the scope of unfair terms as defined in Article 3(1) and Article 4(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC?










4.


Does review of the unfairness of a general term of business in accordance with the provisions of Directive 93/13/EEC extend to a term — contained in a credit agreement entered into by a consumer with a credit institution — which reflects the content of a rule of non-mandatory law of the Member State, where the term was not individually negotiated?






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Case T-348/20: Action brought on 5 June 2020 — Freistaat Bayern v EUIPO (GEWÜRZSOMMELIER)
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, aromatic plant, condiment, consultancy, dietary product, education, prepared foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, traineeship








C_2020247EN.01004602.xml










27.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 247/46






Action brought on 5 June 2020 — Freistaat Bayern v EUIPO (GEWÜRZSOMMELIER)
(Case T-348/20)
(2020/C 247/64)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Freistaat Bayern (Germany) (represented by: J. Altmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark GEWÜRZSOMMELIER — Application for registration No 18 020 504

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 March 2020 in Case R 2430/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-240/20 P: Appeal brought on 5 June 2020 by Giorgio Armani SpA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 26 March 2020 in Case T-654/18, Armani v EUIPO
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, fancy leather goods and glove-making industry, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020390EN.01001801.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/18






Appeal brought on 5 June 2020 by Giorgio Armani SpA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 26 March 2020 in Case T-654/18, Armani v EUIPO
(Case C-240/20 P)
(2020/C 390/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Giorgio Armani SpA (represented by: S. Martínez-Almeida y Alejos-Pita, abogada)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 30 September 2020, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.
Case C-10/20: Order of the President of the Court of 5 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Flightright GmbH v Eurowings GmbH
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, indemnification, traveller








C_2020320EN.01002304.xml










28.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/23






Order of the President of the Court of 5 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Flightright GmbH v Eurowings GmbH
(Case C-10/20) (1)

(2020/C 320/53)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 161, 11.5.2020.
Case T-352/20: Action brought on 5 June 2020 — St. Hippolyt v EUIPO — Elephant (Strong like nature)
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2020247EN.01004801.xml










27.7.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 247/48






Action brought on 5 June 2020 — St. Hippolyt v EUIPO — Elephant (Strong like nature)
(Case T-352/20)
(2020/C 247/66)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH (Dielheim, Germany) (represented by M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Elephant Co. Preduzeće za proizvodnju, unutrašnju i spoljnu trgovinu d.o.o. (Belgrade, Serbia)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union trade mark ‘Strong like nature’ — Application No 17 494 071

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2020 in Case R 1909/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Art. 60(1)(a) read in conjunction with Art. 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 4 June 2020 2020/C 186/02
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2020186EN.01000701.xml










5.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 186/7






Euro exchange rates (1)

4 June 2020
(2020/C 186/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1250 




JPY


Japanese yen


122,48 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4557 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89685 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4172 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0786 




ISK


Iceland króna


148,50 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,6048 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,623 




HUF


Hungarian forint


344,90 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4372 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8373 




TRY


Turkish lira


7,5868 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6276 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5203 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7189 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7510 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5758 




KRW


South Korean won


1 368,73 




ZAR


South African rand


19,0059 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,0066 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5725 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 856,88 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8077 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,109 




RUB


Russian rouble


77,8132 




THB


Thai baht


35,539 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,6989 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,4761 




INR


Indian rupee


84,9320 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/730 of 3 June 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (Official Journal of the European Union L 172 I of 3 June 2020)
Date: 2020-06-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, North Korea, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person








L_2020177EN.01005801.xml










5.6.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 177/58







Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/730 of 3 June 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 172 I of 3 June 2020
)


On the cover page and on page 1:
for:


                  ‘COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/730 of 3 June 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’,

read:


                  ‘COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2020/730 of 2 June 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’;

on page 1:
for:


                  ‘Done at Brussels, 3 June 2020.’,

read:


                  ‘Done at Brussels, 2 June 2020.’