do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-1/21: Action brought on 4 January 2021 — Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ v EUIPO — Bog-Fran (Furniture)
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, furniture industry








C_2021062EN.01004401.xml










22.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 62/44






Action brought on 4 January 2021 — Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ v EUIPO — Bog-Fran (Furniture)
(Case T-1/21)
(2021/C 62/55)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ S.A. (Ostrów Mazowiecka, Poland) (represented by: H. Basiński, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bog-Fran sp. z o.o. sp.k. (Warsaw, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the design at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Design at issue: registered Community design No 1 384 002-0034

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 October 2020 in Case R 595/2020-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and remit the appeal back to the EUIPO;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to bear the costs of the appeal proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court and to reimburse applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;










—


Infringement of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.
Case C-1/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Veliko Tarnovo (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 January 2021 — MC v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Veliko Tarnovo pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, guarantee, interest, legal person, natural person, principle of proportionality, tax collection








C_2021088EN.01001802.xml










15.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 88/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Veliko Tarnovo (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 January 2021 — MC v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Veliko Tarnovo pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite
(Case C-1/21)
(2021/C 88/24)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad Veliko Tarnovo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: MC

Defendant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Veliko Tarnovo pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 9 of the Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests, read in conjunction with Article 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, to be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude, in the harmonised field of value added tax, a national legal instrument such as that provided for in Article 19(2) of the DOPK [Danachno-osiguritelen protsesualen kodeks (Code of Tax and Social Security Procedure)], the application of which has the effect of triggering post factum the joint and several liability of a non-taxable natural person who is not liable for payment of VAT but whose conduct in bad faith led to non-payment of VAT by the taxable legal person which is liable for that payment?










2.


Do the interpretation of those provisions and the application of the principle of proportionality preclude the national legal instrument provided for in Article 19(2) of the DOPK also in respect of interest on VAT not paid in due time by the taxable person liable for that payment?










3.


Is the national legal instrument provided for in Article 19(2) of the DOPK contrary to the principle of proportionality in a case where the late payment of VAT, which led to interest being charged on the VAT debt, is attributable not to the conduct of the non-taxable natural person, but to the conduct of another person or to the manifestation of objective circumstances?






(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 31 December 2020 2021/C 1/03
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021001EN.01000301.xml










4.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 1/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

31 December 2020
(2021/C 1/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2271 




JPY


Japanese yen


126,49 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4409 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89903 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,0343 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0802 




ISK


Iceland króna


156,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,4703 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,242 




HUF


Hungarian forint


363,89 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5597 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8683 




TRY


Turkish lira


9,1131 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5896 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5633 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,5142 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6984 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6218 




KRW


South Korean won


1 336,00 




ZAR


South African rand


18,0219 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,0225 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5519 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 240,76 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9340 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,125 




RUB


Russian rouble


91,4671 




THB


Thai baht


36,727 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3735 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,4160 




INR


Indian rupee


89,6605 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10074 — Hyundai Motor Company/Hyundai Assan Otomotive Sanayi) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 1/04
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2021001EN.01000401.xml










4.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 1/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10074 — Hyundai Motor Company/Hyundai Assan Otomotive Sanayi)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 1/04)

1.   
On 21 December 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:






—


Hyundai Motor Company (‘HMC’, South Korea),










—


Hyundai Assan Otomotiv Sanayi Ve Ticaret A.Ş. (‘HAOS’, Turkey).




HMC acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of HAOS.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for HMC: activities in the motor vehicle sector, including the business of manufacture and sale of motor vehicles,










—


for HAOS: manufacturing and exporting Hyundai motor vehicles.






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.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


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.10074 — Hyundai Motor Company/Hyundai Assan Otomotive Sanayi
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 22964301
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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case C-13/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Miercurea Ciuc (Romania) lodged on 4 January 2021 — Pricoforest SRL v Inspectoratul de Stat pentru Controlul în Transportul Rutier (ISCTR)
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carriage of goods, driving period, rest period, road transport








C_2021128EN.01001301.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/13






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Miercurea Ciuc (Romania) lodged on 4 January 2021 — Pricoforest SRL v Inspectoratul de Stat pentru Controlul în Transportul Rutier (ISCTR)
(Case C-13/21)
(2021/C 128/18)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Judecătoria Miercurea Ciuc

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Pricoforest SRL

Defendant: Inspectoratul de Stat pentru Controlul în Transportul Rutier (ISCTR)

Questions referred







1.


Is the concept of ‘radius of up to 100 km’ referred to in Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation No 561/2006 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a straight line drawn on the map between the base of the undertaking and the destination must be less than 100 km or as meaning that the distance actually travelled by the vehicle must be less than 100 km?










2.


Are the provisions of Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation No 561/2006 to be interpreted as meaning that the carrying out of transport operations within the scope of that provision, some of which remain within a radius of 100 km from the base of the undertaking and others of which exceed that radius, in a period of one month, in the context of the exemption of the situation referred to in Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation No 561/2006 from application of that regulation pursuant to a provision of national law, results in the exemption of all relevant transport operations from application of the regulation, or only those which [do not] […] exceed the radius of 100 km or none of them?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 (OJ 2006 L 102, p. 1).
Prior notification of a concentration Case M.10091 — TowerBrook Capital Partners Warburg Pincus/AA Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 1/05
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, insurance, investment company, maintenance, merger control, motor vehicle, provision of services








C_2021001EN.01000601.xml










4.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 1/6






Prior notification of a concentration
Case M.10091 — TowerBrook Capital Partners Warburg Pincus/AA
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 1/05)

1.   
On 22 December 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:






—


TowerBrook Capital Partners LP (‘TowerBrook’, USA)










—


Warburg Pincus LLP (‘Warburg Pincus’, USA), and










—


AA Plc (‘AA’, UK).




TowerBrook and Warburg Pincus acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of AA.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 25 November 2020.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


TowerBrook is an investment management firm and focuses on making investments in large and middle market European and North American companies.










—


Warburg Pincus is a private equity firm headquartered in New York, United States.










—


AA’s main activity is the provision of road assistance services in the United Kingdom. In addition, AA provides insurance distribution services, insurance underwriting services and certain other financial services products.






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.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


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.10091 — TowerBrook Capital/Warburg Pincus/AA
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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 30 December 2020 2021/C 1/02
Date: 2021-01-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021001EN.01000201.xml










4.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 1/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

30 December 2020
(2021/C 1/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2281 




JPY


Japanese yen


126,57 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4393 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90307 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,0568 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0857 




ISK


Iceland króna


156,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,5470 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,252 




HUF


Hungarian forint


364,88 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5565 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8681 




TRY


Turkish lira


9,0321 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6025 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5701 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,5210 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7071 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6257 




KRW


South Korean won


1 335,83 




ZAR


South African rand


18,0053 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,0134 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5460 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 254,81 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9578 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,026 




RUB


Russian rouble


91,8851 




THB


Thai baht


36,769 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3574 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,3733 




INR


Indian rupee


89,8824 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.