do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-69/21: Action brought on 1 February 2021 — Rotondaro v EUIPO — Pollini (COLLINI)
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021098EN.01003301.xml










22.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/33






Action brought on 1 February 2021 — Rotondaro v EUIPO — Pollini (COLLINI)
(Case T-69/21)
(2021/C 98/37)
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Carmine Rotondaro (Monaco, Monaco) (represented by: M. Locatelli, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pollini SpA (Gatteo, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark COLLINI — Application for registration No 15 841 091

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 December 2020 in Case R 2518/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


uphold the decision of the Opposition Division and declare that the mark COLLINI is registrable as an EU trade mark in respect of all of the goods in Classes 18 and 25 as set out in application for registration No 15 841 091;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of the Instructions adopted by the Executive Director of EUIPO on 22 September 2017 (Decision No EX-17-1);










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10072 — Sojitz/Eneos/Edenvale Solar Park) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 34/10
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, goods and services, merger control, oil industry, petrochemicals, power plant, renewable energy, solar energy








C_2021034EN.01002901.xml










1.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/29






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10072 — Sojitz/Eneos/Edenvale Solar Park)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 34/10)

1.   
On 22 January 2021, 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:






—


Sojitz Corporation (‘Sojitz’, Japan),










—


Eneos Corporation (‘Eneos’, Japan), a wholly owned subsidiary of ENEOS Holdings, Inc. (Japan),










—


Edenvale Solar Park Pty Ltd. (‘Edenvale’, Australia), belonging to DPI Solar 3 Pte ltd (Singapore).




Sojitz Corporation and Eneos Corporation acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Edenvale.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Sojitz Corporation: the trading of good and services and in particular the construction and exploitation of energy and social infrastructure with a focus on solar, wind and biomass power generation,










—


for Eneos Corporation: the production, trading and marketing of crude oil, petroleum products, petrochimicals, electricity, lubricant, coal and hydrogen,










—


for Edenvale: will develop, construct and operate a solar farm in Queensland, Australia.






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.10072 — Sojitz/Eneos/Edenvale Solar Park
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-60/21: Action brought on 1 February 2021 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, free movement of workers, infringement of EU law, maintenance obligation, national law, residence, tax relief, taxable income, taxpayer








C_2021098EN.01001801.xml










22.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/18






Action brought on 1 February 2021 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-60/21)
(2021/C 98/18)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Roels, V. Uher, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:






—


Declare that, by maintaining provisions that:




by refusing the deduction of maintenance annuities or capital sums in lieu of such annuities and supplementary annuities from taxable income to debenture holders who are not resident in Belgium and who receive less than 75 % of their professional income there and who cannot benefit from the same deduction in their Member State of residence on the basis of the small amount of their taxable income in that State,
the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Article 28 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA), and






—


Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the Commission relies on a single plea in law alleging that the legislation at issue is liable to deter non-resident taxpayers from exercising the freedoms of movement ensured by the Treaties and, more particularly, the freedom of movement of workers laid down in Article 45 TFEU and Article 28 of the EEA Agreement.
A non-resident taxpayer who does not derive at least 75 % of his or her taxable professional income from Belgium and who cannot effectively benefit from the deduction of maintenance annuities in his or her State of residence in the absence of sufficient taxable income in that State is deprived by Belgian legislation of the benefit of any deduction of those annuities. However, it follows from the case-law of the Court of Justice and in particular its judgment of 10 May 2012 in Case C-39/10, European Commission v Estonia that, in such a case, it is for the State of employment to take into account the personal and family circumstances of the non-resident taxpayer.
SIT 2021 – Call for proposals Ideas that change the world: the EIBI’s 2021 Social Innovation Tournament 2021/C 34 I/01
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: European Investment Bank
Subjects: European social policy, environmental impact, innovation, invitation to tender, social impact, sustainable development








CI2021034EN.01000101.xml










1.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 34/1






SIT 2021 – Call for proposals
Ideas that change the world: the EIBI’s 2021 Social Innovation Tournament
(2021/C 34 I/01)
EIB Institute organises its tenth Social Innovation Tournament
The SIT promotes innovative ideas and rewards initiatives that create social and environmental impact, covering projects in a wide range of fields – from education, healthcare and job creation, to new technologies, systems and processes. All projects compete for two prizes in a General Category, and projects addressing this year’s topic of sustainable living will also compete for two prizes in the Special Category. To mark the tenth anniversary of the SIT, winning projects in both categories will be awarded a first or second prize of EUR 75 000 or EUR 30 000 respectively, and an Audience Choice Award of EUR 10 000.
Follow us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/EibInstitute
For further information on this tournament and how to submit an innovative proposal, go to: http://institute.eib.org/programmes/social/social-innovation-tournament/
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10084 — ACP/Marubeni/Toho Gas/GGND) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 54/01
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy distribution, energy industry, gas pipeline, gas supply, investment company, merger control, natural gas, provision of services, retail trade








C_2021054EN.01000101.xml










16.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 54/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10084 — ACP/Marubeni/Toho Gas/GGND)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 54/01)
On 1 February 2021, 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 32021M10084. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-59/21 P: Appeal brought on 1 February 2021 by Embutidos Monells, SA against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 2 December 2020 in Case T-639/19, Sánchez Romero Carvajal Jabugo v EUIPO — Embutidos Monells (5MS MMMMM)
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, game meat, meat product, poultrymeat, preserved product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021252EN.01000603.xml










28.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/6






Appeal brought on 1 February 2021 by Embutidos Monells, SA against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 2 December 2020 in Case T-639/19, Sánchez Romero Carvajal Jabugo v EUIPO — Embutidos Monells (5MS MMMMM)
(Case C-59/21 P)
(2021/C 252/10)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Embutidos Monells, SA (represented by: L. Broschat García and L. Polo Flores, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: Sánchez Romero Carvajal Jabugo, S. A. U., European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 18 May 2021, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) ruled that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered Embutidos Monells, SA to bear its own costs.
Case C-58/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 1 February 2021 — FK
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: economic activity, lawyer, pension scheme, residence, social-security harmonisation, third country








C_2021163EN.01001201.xml










3.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 163/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 1 February 2021 — FK
(Case C-58/21)
(2021/C 163/16)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Complainant: FK

Respondent authority: Rechtsanwaltskammer Wien

Questions referred







1.


How is Article 13(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (1) to be interpreted where, from a quantitative point of view, the centre of interest of the activities of a person is in a non-Member State in which that person also resides and, furthermore, that person also pursues an activity in two Member States (Federal Republic of Germany and Austria), the activity in the two Member States being distributed in such a way that the bulk of the activity clearly takes place in one Member State (in this specific case, the Federal Republic of Germany)?
In the event that that provision is interpreted to the effect that Austria has competence, [the following question] is [asked]:










2.


[Are] the provision of Paragraph 50(2)(2)(c)(aa) of the Rechtsanwaltsordnung (Code of Lawyers) (2) and the provision of Paragraph 26(1)(8) of the Satzung Teil A 2018 (2018 Statute for Part A) based thereon permissible under EU law or do they infringe EU law and the rights guaranteed under EU law by requiring, as a condition for the award of a retirement pension, that the right to practise law in Austria and abroad be waived (Paragraph 50(2)(2)(c)(aa)) or that the right to practise as a lawyer anywhere be waived (Paragraph 26(1)(8) of the 2018 Statute for Part A)?






(1)  OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1.

(2)  RGBl. Nr. 96/1868 idF BGBl I Nr. 10/2017.
Case T-66/21: Action brought on 1 February 2021 — Precisis v EUIPO — Easee (EASEE)
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, optical industry, product design, registered trade mark, retail trade, software, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2021088EN.01004401.xml










15.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 88/44






Action brought on 1 February 2021 — Precisis v EUIPO — Easee (EASEE)
(Case T-66/21)
(2021/C 88/58)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Precisis AG (Heidelberg, Germany) (represented by: I. Fowler and C. Stöber, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Easee BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark EASEE — Application for registration No 15 514 706

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 November 2020 in Case R 2948/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant and the other party before the Board of Appeal in the event that it intervenes in the proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-67/21: Action brought on 1 February 2021 — ultra air v EUIPO — Donaldson Filtration Deutschland (ultrafilter international)
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, machinery, maintenance, measuring equipment, piping, pressure equipment, registered trade mark, technical education, trade-mark law








C_2021088EN.01004501.xml










15.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 88/45






Action brought on 1 February 2021 — ultra air v EUIPO — Donaldson Filtration Deutschland (ultrafilter international)
(Case T-67/21)
(2021/C 88/59)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: ultra air GmbH (Hilden, Germany) (represented by: C. König, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Donaldson Filtration Deutschland GmbH (Haan, Germany)

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 ‘ultrafilter international’ — European Union trade mark No 1 121 839

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 November 2020 in Case R 271/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and Donaldson Filtration Deutschland GmbH, should it intervene in these proceedings, to pay the costs of the present proceedings and of the appeal proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 67 in conjunction with Article 63(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 29 January 2021 2021/C 34/08
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021034EN.01002601.xml










1.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/26






Euro exchange rates (1)

29 January 2021
(2021/C 34/08)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2136 




JPY


Japanese yen


127,05 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4370 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88383 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1110 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0798 




ISK


Iceland króna


156,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,3430 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,020 




HUF


Hungarian forint


358,39 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5304 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8750 




TRY


Turkish lira


8,8772 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5819 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5520 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,4093 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6863 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6121 




KRW


South Korean won


1 354,98 




ZAR


South African rand


18,3058 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8047 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5658 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 994,16 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9060 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,333 




RUB


Russian rouble


91,8979 




THB


Thai baht


36,287 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,6568 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,5417 




INR


Indian rupee


88,4320 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Notice concerning the date of entry into force of the Amendments to Annexes 14-A and 14-B and to Appendices 2-C-1 and 2-C-2 of the Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Japan, approval, cooperation agreement (EU), designation of origin, economic cooperation, motor vehicle, product designation, revision of an agreement, technical standard








L_2021035EN.01000101.xml










1.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 35/1







Notice concerning the date of entry into force of the Amendments to Annexes 14-A and 14-B and to Appendices 2-C-1 and 2-C-2 of the Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership

The Amendments to Annexes 14-A and 14-B and to Appendices 2-C-1 and 2-C-2 to Annex 2-C of the Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership (1), signed in Tokyo on 17 July 2018, entered into force on 1 February 2021.


(1)  
            OJ L 330, 27.12.2018, p. 3.
Corrigendum to Protocol to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America, on the other, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (Official Journal of the European Union L 441 of 30 December 2020)
Date: 2021-02-01
Institutions: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Panama, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom
Subjects: Central America, Croatia, accession to the European Union, association agreement (EU), interim agreement (EU), multilateral agreement, protocol to an agreement








L_2021035EN.01005001.xml










1.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 35/50







Corrigendum to Protocol to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America, on the other, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 441 of 30 December 2020
)


This publication is to be considered null and void.