do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-609/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 17 November 2020 — Soelia SpA v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE
Date: 2020-11-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electrical energy, energy production, investment promotion, ownership, payment, principle of legal certainty, renewable energy, solar energy








C_2021053EN.01002101.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/21






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 17 November 2020 — Soelia SpA v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE
(Case C-609/20)
(2021/C 53/27)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Soelia SpA

Defendants: Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE

Question referred

Does EU law preclude the application of a provision of national law, such as that in Article 26(2) and (3) of Decree-Law No 91/2014, as converted by Law No 116/2014, which significantly reduces or delays the payment of incentives already granted by law and defined on the basis of corresponding agreements concluded by undertakings generating electrical energy by means of photovoltaic conversion with Gestore dei servizi energetici SpA, a public company responsible for that process?
In particular, is that provision of national law compatible with the general principles of EU law relating to legitimate expectation, legal certainty, sincere cooperation and effectiveness, with Articles 16 and 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, with Directive 2009/28/EC (1) and with the rules governing support schemes laid down in that directive, and with Article 216(2) TFEU, in particular in relation to the European Energy Charter Treaty?


(1)  Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (OJ 2009 L 140, p. 16).
Commission Regulation (EU) 2020/1751 of 17 November 2020 conferring protection under Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the name ‘Würzburger Stein-Berg’ (PDO)
Date: 2020-11-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Bavaria, Germany, designation of origin, labelling, product designation, white wine, wine of superior quality








L_2020394EN.01000401.xml










24.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 394/4








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2020/1751
of 17 November 2020
         
conferring protection under Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the name ‘Würzburger Stein-Berg’ (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)


In accordance with Article 97(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the Commission has examined the application to register the name ‘Würzburger Stein-Berg’ sent by Germany and has published it in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


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












(3)


In accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the name ‘Würzburger Stein-Berg’ should be protected and entered in the register referred to in Article 104 of that Regulation.












(4)


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 name ‘Würzburger Stein-Berg’ (PDO) is hereby protected.


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, 17 November 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 124, 17.4.2020, p. 26.
Case T-257/20: Order of the General Court of 17 November 2020 — González Calvet v SRB (Action for annulment — Economic and monetary policy — Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) — Decision refusing to grant financial compensation to the shareholders and creditors concerned — Failure to comply with formal requirements — Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2020-11-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, Spain, admissibility, bank, banking supervision, claim, company in difficulties, financial solvency, indemnification, shareholder








C_2021019EN.01005101.xml










18.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/51






Order of the General Court of 17 November 2020 — González Calvet v SRB
(Case T-257/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Economic and monetary policy - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - Decision refusing to grant financial compensation to the shareholders and creditors concerned - Failure to comply with formal requirements - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Manifest inadmissibility)
(2021/C 19/55)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: Ramón González Calvet (Barcelona, Spain) and Joan González Calvet (Barcelona) (represented by: P. Molina Bosch, lawyer)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: S. Branca, J. King, L. Forestier and E. Muratori, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, F. Louis, V. Del Pozo Espinosa De Los Monteros and L. Hesse, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of SRB Decision SRB/EES/2020/52 of 17 March 2020 determining whether compensation needs to be granted to the shareholders and creditors in respect of which the resolution actions concerning Banco Popular Español S.A. have been effected.

Operative part of the order

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application to intervene by the Kingdom of Spain.










3.


Orders Mr Ramón González Calvet and Mr Joan González Calvet to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Single Resolution Board (SRB), with the exception of those relating to the application to intervene of the Kingdom of Spain.










4.


Orders Messrs González Calvet, the SRB and the Kingdom of Spain to each bear their own costs relating to the application to intervene of the Kingdom of Spain.






(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Judgment of the Court of 17 November 2020 in Case E-9/19 Abelia and WTW AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority
Date: 2020-11-17
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, control of State aid, e-Health, employers' organisation, health care system, provision of services, public financing, public sector








C_2021075EN.01000501.xml










4.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 75/5






JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 17 November 2020
in Case E-9/19
Abelia and WTW AS
v
EFTA Surveillance Authority

(Action for annulment of a decision of the EFTA Surveillance Authority – State aid – eHealth – Admissibility – Status as interested party – Doubts or serious difficulties – Notion of an undertaking)

(2021/C 75/05)
In Case E-9/19, Abelia and WTW AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority – APPLICATION for the annulment of EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 57/19/COL of 10 July 2019 to close the case without opening the formal investigation procedure as to whether the public financing of eHealth and digital health infrastructure in the Norwegian healthcare system, as well as the provision of certain support services and registers, constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area, the Court, composed of Páll Hreinsson, President, Per Christiansen and Bernd Hammermann (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 17 November 2020, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Dismisses the application as unfounded.










2.


Orders the applicants to pay the costs incurred by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.
Case C-611/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 17 November 2020 — Cosilt — Consorzio per lo sviluppo economico locale di Tolmezzo v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE
Date: 2020-11-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electrical energy, energy production, investment promotion, ownership, payment, principle of legal certainty, renewable energy, solar energy








C_2021053EN.01002202.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/22






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 17 November 2020 — Cosilt — Consorzio per lo sviluppo economico locale di Tolmezzo v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE
(Case C-611/20)
(2021/C 53/29)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Cosilt — Consorzio per lo sviluppo economico locale di Tolmezzo

Defendants: Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE

Question referred

Does EU law preclude the application of a provision of national law, such as that in Article 26(2) and (3) of Decree-Law No 91/2014, as converted by Law No 116/2014, which significantly reduces or delays the payment of incentives already granted by law and defined on the basis of corresponding agreements concluded by undertakings generating electrical energy by means of photovoltaic conversion with Gestore dei servizi energetici SpA, a public company responsible for that process?
In particular, is that provision of national law compatible with the general principles of EU law relating to legitimate expectation, legal certainty, sincere cooperation and effectiveness, with Articles 16 and 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, with Directive 2009/28/EC (1) and with the rules governing support schemes laid down in that directive, and with Article 216(2) TFEU, in particular in relation to the European Energy Charter Treaty?


(1)  Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (OJ 2009 L 140, p. 16).