do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-738/20: Action brought on 17 December 2020 — Deutschtec v EUIPO — Group A (HOLUX)
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, metal product, metals, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021053EN.01005101.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/51






Action brought on 17 December 2020 — Deutschtec v EUIPO — Group A (HOLUX)
(Case T-738/20)
(2021/C 53/67)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Deutschtec GmbH (Petershagen/Eggersdorf, Germany) (represented by: R. Arnade, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Group A NV (Hasselt, Belgium)

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 word mark HOLUX — Application for registration No 17 371 378

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 October 2020 in Case R 223/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and the decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO of 26 November 2019 in case B 3 051 677 to the extent it upholds the opposition;










—


order EUIPO to bear the costs.





Plea in law







—


The contested decision lacks the necessary conclusion drawn from the fact that the terms ‘common metal and alloys thereof’ as well as ‘metal goods’ in Class 6 are too vague. Furthermore, it lacks a diligent analysis whether the addressees in the market would consider goods deriving from the same origin.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 16 December 2020 2020/C 436/04
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2020436EN.01000401.xml










17.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/4






Euro exchange rates (1)

16 December 2020
(2020/C 436/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2189 




JPY


Japanese yen


125,97 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4415 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89950 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1785 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0786 




ISK


Iceland króna


155,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,5788 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,200 




HUF


Hungarian forint


355,52 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4354 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8688 




TRY


Turkish lira


9,5219 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6103 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5551 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,4489 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7168 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6203 




KRW


South Korean won


1 332,90 




ZAR


South African rand


18,1175 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9633 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5373 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 259,87 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9384 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,605 




RUB


Russian rouble


89,4535 




THB


Thai baht


36,616 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2306 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,2123 




INR


Indian rupee


89,7730 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2142 of 17 December 2020 amending Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 in support of combating the illicit trade in and proliferation of small arms and light weapons in the Member States of the League of Arab States
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Arab League countries, European arms policy, arms control, arms trade, fight against crime, firearms and munitions, illicit trade, non-proliferation of arms, regional security, small arms








L_2020430EN.01002501.xml










18.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 430/25








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2020/2142
of 17 December 2020
         
amending Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 in support of combating the illicit trade in and proliferation of small arms and light weapons in the Member States of the League of Arab States


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 28(1) and 31(1) thereof,


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 19 November 2018, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 (1) in support of combating the illicit trade in and proliferation of small arms and light weapons in the Member States of the League of Arab States.












(2)


Article 5(2) of Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 provides that that Decision is to expire 24 months after the date of conclusion of the agreement referred to in Article 3(3) of that Decision.












(3)


On 30 October 2020, the Small Arms Survey (SAS), which is the implementing Agency of the project referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789, requested the authorisation of the Union to extend the implementation period set out in that Decision by six months, thereby bringing the total duration of the implementation period to 30 months. The requested extension is due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent postponement of a number of activities provided for by the project.












(4)


The requested amendment of Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 concerns Article 5(2) thereof.












(5)


The extension of the implementation period set out in Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 by six months can be performed without any financial resource implication,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 5(2) of Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 is hereby replaced by the following:






‘2.


This Decision shall expire 30 months after the date of the conclusion of the agreement referred to in Article 3(3).’.






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




Done at Brussels, 17 December 2020.


For the Council


The President

S. SCHULZE
            





(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1789 of 19 November 2018 in support of combating the illicit trade in and proliferation of small arms and light weapons in the Member States of the League of Arab States (OJ L 293, 20.11.2018, p. 24).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10052 — Eni/UFG (Assets)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 5/03
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy transport, gas industry, gas supply, merger control, oil industry








C_2021005EN.01000301.xml










7.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10052 — Eni/UFG (Assets))
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 5/03)
On 17 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M10052. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Joined Cases C-431/19 P and C-432/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 December 2020 — Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. (C-431/19 P), Inpost S.A. (C-432/19 P) v European Commission, Republic of Poland (Appeal — State aid — Article 106(2) TFEU — Services of general economic interest (SGEIs) — European Union framework — Application to State aid in the form of public service compensation — Postal sector — Directive 97/67/EC — Article 7 — Compensation of the net costs resulting from universal service obligations — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market)
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, postal service, services of general interest, universal service








C_2021053EN.01001101.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/11






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 December 2020 — Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. (C-431/19 P), Inpost S.A. (C-432/19 P) v European Commission, Republic of Poland
(Joined Cases C-431/19 P and C-432/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 106(2) TFEU - Services of general economic interest (SGEIs) - European Union framework - Application to State aid in the form of public service compensation - Postal sector - Directive 97/67/EC - Article 7 - Compensation of the net costs resulting from universal service obligations - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market)
(2021/C 53/12)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Appellants: Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. (represented by: M. Doktór, radca prawny (C-431/19 P)), Inpost S.A (represented by: W. Knopkiewicz, radca prawny (C-432/19 P))

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia, K. Blanck and K Herrmann, acting as Agents), Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeals;










2.


Orders Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. and Inpost S.A. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Case C-710/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 December 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — Belgium) — G.M.A. v État belge (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of movement for persons — Article 45 TFEU — Citizenship of the Union — Directive 2004/38/EC — Right of residence for more than three months — Article 14(4)(b) — Jobseekers — Reasonable period of time to acquaint themselves with potentially suitable employment opportunities and take the necessary steps to obtain employment — Requirements imposed by the host Member State on the jobseeker during that period — Conditions governing the right of residence — Obligation to continue seeking employment and to have a genuine chance of being engaged)
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European citizenship, free movement of persons, free movement of workers, job application, residence permit








C_2021062EN.01000801.xml










22.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 62/8






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 December 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — Belgium) — G.M.A. v État belge
(Case C-710/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of movement for persons - Article 45 TFEU - Citizenship of the Union - Directive 2004/38/EC - Right of residence for more than three months - Article 14(4)(b) - Jobseekers - Reasonable period of time to acquaint themselves with potentially suitable employment opportunities and take the necessary steps to obtain employment - Requirements imposed by the host Member State on the jobseeker during that period - Conditions governing the right of residence - Obligation to continue seeking employment and to have a genuine chance of being engaged)
(2021/C 62/07)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: G.M.A.

Defendant: État belge

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 TFEU and Article 14(4)(b) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that a host Member State is required to grant a reasonable period of time to a Union citizen, which starts to run from the time when that Union citizen registered as a jobseeker, in order to allow that person to acquaint himself or herself with potentially suitable employment opportunities and take the necessary steps to obtain employment.
During that period, the host Member State may require the jobseeker to provide evidence that he or she is seeking employment. It is only after the expiry of that period that that Member State may require the jobseeker to show not only that he or she is continuing to seek employment but also that he or she has a genuine chance of being engaged.


(1)  OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10062 — SDK/Freja Transport & Logistics) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 1/01
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: air transport, carriage of goods, economic concentration, harbour installation, land transport, logistics, maritime transport, merger control, waterway transport








C_2021001EN.01000101.xml










4.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 1/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10062 — SDK/Freja Transport & Logistics)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 1/01)
On 17 December 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M10062. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2143 of 17 December 2020 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, territorial dispute








L_2020430EN.01002601.xml










18.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 430/26








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2020/2143
of 17 December 2020
         
amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine


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 31 July 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/512/CFSP (1).












(2)


On 19 March 2015, the European Council agreed that the necessary measures would be taken to clearly link the duration of the restrictive measures to the complete implementation of the Minsk agreements, bearing in mind that the complete implementation was foreseen for 31 December 2015.












(3)


On 29 June 2020, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2020/907 (2), renewing Decision 2014/512/CFSP until 31 January 2021 in order to enable it to further assess the implementation of the Minsk agreements.












(4)


Having assessed the implementation of the Minsk agreements, the Council considers that Decision 2014/512/CFSP should be renewed for a further six months in order to enable the Council to further assess their implementation.












(5)


Decision 2014/512/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The first subparagraph of Article 9(1) of Decision 2014/512/CFSP is replaced by the following:






‘1.


This Decision shall apply until 31 July 2021.’.






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, 17 December 2020.


For the Council


The President

S. SCHULZE
            





(1)  Council Decision 2014/512/CFSP of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ L 229, 31.7.2014, p. 13).

(2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/907 of 29 June 2020 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ L 207, 30.6.2020, p. 37).
Case C-346/19: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 December 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Bundeszentralamt für Steuern v Y-GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Refund of VAT — Directive 2008/9/EC — Article 8(2)(d) — Article 15 — Indication of number of the invoice — Refund application)
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, VAT, establishment, invoicing, tax collection, tax rebate, taxpayer








C_2021053EN.01000802.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/8






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 December 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Bundeszentralamt für Steuern v Y-GmbH
(Case C-346/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Refund of VAT - Directive 2008/9/EC - Article 8(2)(d) - Article 15 - Indication of number of the invoice - Refund application)
(2021/C 53/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bundeszentralamt für Steuern

Defendant: Y-GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8(2)(d) and Article 15(1) of Council Directive 2008/9/EC of 12 February 2008 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State, as amended by Council Directive 2010/66/EU of 14 October 2010, must be interpreted as meaning that, where an application for a refund of value added tax does not contain a sequential number of the invoice, but does contain another number which allows that invoice, and thus the good or service in question, to be identified, the tax authority of the Member State of refund must consider that application ‘submitted’ within the meaning of Article 15(1) of Directive 2008/9, as amended by Directive 2010/66, and proceed with its assessment. In making that assessment, and save where that authority already has available to it the original invoice or a copy thereof, it may request that the applicant produce a sequential number which uniquely identifies the invoice and, if that request is not satisfied within the deadline of one month laid down in Article 20(2) of that directive, as amended by Directive 2010/66, it is entitled to reject the application for a refund.


(1)  OJ C 263, 5.8.2019.
Case T-739/20: Action brought on 17 December 2020 — Unite the Union v EUIPO — WWRD Ireland (WATERFORD)
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, glass industry, hairdressing and beauty care, lighting equipment, registered trade mark, smoking, textile industry, tinplate and cutlery industry, trade-mark law








C_2021062EN.01003602.xml










22.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 62/36






Action brought on 17 December 2020 — Unite the Union v EUIPO — WWRD Ireland (WATERFORD)
(Case T-739/20)
(2021/C 62/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Unite the Union (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: B. O’Connor, Solicitor and M. Hommé, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: WWRD Ireland IPCO LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark WATERFORD — European Union trade mark No 397 521

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 September 2020 in Case R 2683/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


alter the contested decision in such a way as to find that the trade mark WATERFORD should be revoked within the terms of Article 58 EUTMR;










—


order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 58(1)(c) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures 2020/C 436/09
Date: 2020-12-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: Russia, aluminium, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, thin sheet








C_2020436EN.01002201.xml










17.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/22






Notice of the expiry of certain anti-dumping measures
(2020/C 436/09)
Further to the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1) following which no duly substantiated request for a review was lodged, the Commission gives notice that the anti-dumping measure mentioned below will expire.
This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (2).









Product


Country(ies) of origin or exportation


Measures


Reference


Date of expiry (3)





Aluminium foils


Russia


Anti-dumping duty


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2385 of 17 December 2015 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain aluminium foils originating in the Russian Federation
(OJ L 332, 18.12.2015, p. 91)


19.12.2020






(1)  OJ C 98, 25.3.2020, p. 11


(2)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(3)  The measure will expire at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.