do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
New national side of euro coins intended for circulation 2020/C 393/05
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: Germany, commemoration, euro, issuing of currency








C_2020393EN.01000501.xml










18.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 393/5






New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
(2020/C 393/05)




National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Germany

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Germany

Subject of commemoration: The 50th anniversary of Willy Brandt’s Kniefall von Warschau


Description of the design: The design shows Brandt, who was the chancellor of Germany at that time, keeling before the Monument to the Ghetto Heroes in Warsaw in a gesture of humility. Yhe Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943 is evoked by the composition’s powerful imagery. Traced in extremely fine relief, the design pictures compelling symbols: a seven-branched menorah, the ghetto victims, as well as the genuflection. The inner part of the coin also features the artist’s initials (top), the mint mark of the respective mint (‘A’, ‘D’, ‘F’, ‘G’ or ‘J’), the year, ‘2020’ (centre left), Germany’s issuing country code, ‘D’ (bottom right), and the lettering ‘50 JAHRE KNIEFALL VON WARSCHAU’.
The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued: 30 000 000

Date of issue: October 2020


(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).
New national side of euro coins intended for circulation 2020/C 393/03
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: Lithuania, commemoration, euro, issuing of currency








C_2020393EN.01000301.xml










18.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 393/3






New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
(2020/C 393/03)




National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Lithuania

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Lithuania

Subject of commemoration: UNESCO Cultural Heritage - Kryžių Kalnas (the Hill of Crosses)

Description of the design: The design depicts the Hill of Crosses: fragments of wooden and forged crosses, symbolising Lithuanian cross-crafting and folk culture. Cross-crafting and cross-symbolism in Lithuania are included in the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. The inscriptions featured are: Lithuania’s name ‘LIETUVA’, the year of issue ‘2020’ on the top, ‘KRYŽIŲ KALNAS’ (the Hill of Crosses) and the mark of the Lithuanian Mint at the bottom. The design is realised by Rytas Jonas Belevičius.
The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued: 500 000

Date of issue: Fourth quarter of 2020


(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 17 November 2020 2020/C 393/02
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2020393EN.01000201.xml










18.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 393/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

17 November 2020
(2020/C 393/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1882 




JPY


Japanese yen


123,78 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4480 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89585 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2375 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0816 




ISK


Iceland króna


161,50 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,7683 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,508 




HUF


Hungarian forint


361,50 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4964 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8720 




TRY


Turkish lira


9,2071 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6236 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5560 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2119 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7234 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5962 




KRW


South Korean won


1 314,74 




ZAR


South African rand


18,3062 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7892 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5668 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 779,76 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8770 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,389 




RUB


Russian rouble


90,7340 




THB


Thai baht


35,836 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,4375 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,2129 




INR


Indian rupee


88,4825 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Amendments to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice 2021/C 245/13
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway
Subjects: EFTA Court, EFTA countries, United Kingdom, multilateral agreement, protocol to an agreement, revision of an agreement, withdrawal from the EU








C_2021245EN.01001601.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/16






Amendments to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice
(2021/C 245/13)
The Agreement amending Protocol 9 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice, signed in Brussels on 18 November 2020, entered into force on 22 December 2020 and is applied from 1 January 2021.
This Agreement and the updated consolidated version of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice have now been published on the EFTA Secretariat’s website.
They can be found through the following links:
https://www.efta.int/Agreement-Annexes-and-Protocols-2477
and
https://www.efta.int/legal-texts/the-surveillance-and-court-agreement/amendments-protocol-9
Case T-694/20: Action brought on 18 November 2020 — Canisius v EUIPO — Beiersdorf (CCLABELLE VIENNA)
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, toiletries, trade-mark law








C_2021028EN.01005901.xml










25.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 28/59






Action brought on 18 November 2020 — Canisius v EUIPO — Beiersdorf (CCLABELLE VIENNA)
(Case T-694/20)
(2021/C 28/88)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Maria Alexandra Canisius (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: H. Asenbauer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Beiersdorf AG (Hamburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark containing the word element CCLABELLE VIENNA — Application for registration No 17 592 461

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2020 in Case R 2233/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


partially annul the contested decision insofar as the opposition was upheld in respect of the goods in Classes 3 and 16;










—


order the defendant and Beiersdorf, should Beiersdorf join this proceeding, to pay its own costs and to bear all the fees and costs of the applicant;










—


dismiss the opposition brought by Beiersdorf against the registration of application No 17 592 461 and order EUIPO to allow the (contested) application No 17 592 461 to proceed to the registration in relation to all goods and services applied for in Classes 3, 16, and 25 as well as order Beiersdorf to bear its own costs and pay all the fees and costs incurred by the applicant due to the opposition proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Misapplication of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-377/19: Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark TC CARL — Earlier national figurative mark CARL TOUCH — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, maintenance, printer, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2021019EN.01004602.xml










18.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/46






Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL)
(Case T-377/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark TC CARL - Earlier national figurative mark CARL TOUCH - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2021/C 19/48)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Topcart GmbH (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: M. Hoffmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Carl International (Limonest, France) (represented by: B. Müller, lawyer)

Re

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2019 (Case R 1826/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Carl International and Topcart.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Topcart GmbH to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Oslo tingrett dated 18 November 2020 in the case of Q and Others v The Norwegian Government (Case E-16/20) 2021/C 113/05
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Norway, child, dependant, foreign national, free movement of persons, parental authority, parental responsibility, residence permit








C_2021113EN.01001001.xml










31.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/10






Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Oslo tingrett dated 18 November 2020 in the case of Q and Others v The Norwegian Government
(Case E-16/20)
(2021/C 113/05)
A request has been made to the EFTA Court dated 18 November 2020 from Oslo tingrett (Oslo District Court), which was received at the Court Registry on 18 November 2020, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of Q and Others v The Norwegian Government on the following questions:






1.


The EU Court of Justice has held that Article 21 TFEU and Directive 2004/38/EC grant a right to reside in a host State to a minor child who is a national of another EU State and who satisfies the conditions laid down in Article 7(1)(b), and that ‘the same provisions’ allow a parent who is that child’s primary carer to reside with the child in the host Member State, see, for example Case C-86/12 Alokpa paragraph 29. At the same time, the EU Court of Justice has also held that such a parent does not come within the personal scope of the Directive as provided for in Article 3(1), see Alokpa paragraphs 24-26.
In a situation as described above, may the parent’s right of residence be based on the Directive alone or in the light of the EEA Agreement, or does such a right presuppose that the Directive is to be applied together with Article 21 TFEU, or possibly that the Directive is to be given a broad interpretation in the light of Article 21 TFEU?










2.


Article 12(3) of Directive 2004/38/EC confers a right to continued residence on a child of an EEA national who is enrolled at an approved educational establishment and the person who has parental responsibility (custody) of the child should the EEA national depart from the country. May a child who is the descendant of the EEA national’s spouse only, who was granted a right of residence using the EEA national as a reference person, also derive such a right under the Directive alone or in the light of the EEA Agreement? Does this also hold true if the EEA national has applied for divorce from the parent of that child before departing from the country?










3.


If question 2 is answered in the affirmative, does this also hold true if the marriage of the child’s mother or father was an abuse of rights under Article 35 of Directive 2004/38/EC, but was perceived as being genuine by the EEA national and the child?
Case C-77/19: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 132(1)(f) — Exemption of supplies of services made by independent groups of persons to their members — Applicability to VAT groups — Article 11 — VAT group)
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, educational institution, organisation, provision of services, tax exemption, taxpayer








C_2021028EN.01000301.xml










25.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 28/3






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
(Case C-77/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 132(1)(f) - Exemption of supplies of services made by independent groups of persons to their members - Applicability to VAT groups - Article 11 - VAT group)
(2021/C 28/03)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd

Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Operative part of the judgment

Article 132(1)(f) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2008/8/EC of 12 February 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption laid down in that provision is not applicable to supplies of services made by an independent group of persons to a group of persons that may be regarded as a single taxable person, within the meaning of Article 11 of that directive, where not all the members of that latter group are members of that independent group of persons. The existence of provisions of national law which require that the representative member of such a group of persons possess the characteristics and status of the members of the independent group of persons concerned, for the purposes of application of the exemption for independent groups of persons, has no bearing in that regard.


(1)  OJ C 131, 8.4.2019.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9997 - HMM/CMA CGM/DIF/TTIA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 393/06
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: carriage for hire or reward, container, economic concentration, harbour installation, investment company, logistics, maritime shipping, merger control, multinational enterprise








C_2020393EN.01000601.xml










18.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 393/6






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9997 - HMM/CMA CGM/DIF/TTIA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 393/06)

1.   
On 9 November 2020, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


HMM Co. Ltd (‘HMM’, South Korea),










—


CMA CGM S.A. (‘CMA CGM’, France), jointly controlled by Merit Corporation (Lebanon) and Banque Publique d’Investissement (Bpifrance, formerly FSI, France),










—


DIF Management Holding B.V. (‘DIF’, the Netherlands) through its fund DIF Core Infrastructure Fund I Cooperatief, U.A. (‘DIF CIF Finance’, the Netherlands),










—


Total Terminal International Algeciras, S.A. (‘TTIA’, Spain) currently under HMM’s sole control.




HMM, CMA CGM and DIF acquire(s) within the meaning of Articles 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of TTIA.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for HMM: integrated logistics company that operates around 110 state-of-the-art vessels and various logistics facilities spanning a worldwide network of ports together with industry leading IT shipping related systems,










—


for CMA CGM: international group of companies mainly involved in container liner shipping and port terminal services. CMA CGM is also active on the market for freight forwarding and contract logistics services,










—


for DIF: independent fund management company with focus on long-term infrastructure asset types and markets,










—


for TTIA: container terminal operator located in the Port of Algeciras Bay, Spain.






3.   

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.



4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.9997 — HMM/CMA CGM/DIF/TTIA
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 229-64301
Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-735/18: Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — Aquind v ACER (Energy — Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 — Decision of ACER refusing a request for exemption relating to new electrical interconnectors — Appeal before the Board of Appeal of ACER — Intensity of the review)
Date: 2020-11-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, United Kingdom, electrical energy, energy grid, energy transport








C_2021019EN.01004601.xml










18.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/46






Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — Aquind v ACER
(Case T-735/18) (1)

(Energy - Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 - Decision of ACER refusing a request for exemption relating to new electrical interconnectors - Appeal before the Board of Appeal of ACER - Intensity of the review)
(2021/C 19/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Aquind Ltd (Wallsend, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Goldberg and C. Davis, Solicitors, and E. White, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (represented by: P. Martinet, E. Tremmel, C. Gence-Creux and A. Hofstadter, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of (i) Decision A-001-2018 of the Board of Appeal of ACER of 17 October 2018 which upheld Decision No 05/2018 of ACER of 19 June 2018 refusing a request for exemption relating to an electrical interconnector connecting the electricity transmission systems in the United Kingdom and France, and (ii) the decision of ACER thus upheld.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Decision A-001-2018 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 17 October 2018;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders ACER to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Aquind Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.