do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-86/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla y León (Spain) lodged on 11 February 2021 — Gerencia Regional de Salud de Castilla y León v Delia
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: free movement of workers, health care profession, health service, recognition of vocational training qualifications, seniority








C_2021189EN.01001001.xml










17.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/10






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla y León (Spain) lodged on 11 February 2021 — Gerencia Regional de Salud de Castilla y León v Delia
(Case C-86/21)
(2021/C 189/10)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Castilla y León

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Gerencia Regional de Salud de Castilla y León

Respondent: Delia

Questions referred







1.


Do Article 45 TFEU and Article 7 of Regulation No [492]/2011 (1) preclude a national provision such as Article 6(2)(c) of Decree 43/2009 of 2 July 2009, which prohibits the recognition of periods of service in a particular occupational category in a public health service of another Member State of the European Union?










2.


If the answer to question 1 is affirmative, could the recognition of periods of service in the public health system of a Member State be made conditional on the prior adoption of general approval criteria for the career systems of staff of the health services of Member States of the European Union?






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union (OJ 2011 L 141, p. 1).
Decision No 2/EC/2020 of 11 February 2021 of the Joint Committee set up under the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and Japan related to the registration of a conformity assessment body under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment [2021/433]
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: European Union, Japan, Joint Committee
Subjects: EC conformity marking, Japan, agreement (EU), approval, mutual recognition principle, radio equipment, telecommunications equipment








L_2021086EN.01001701.xml










12.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 86/17








            DECISION No 2/EC/2020
of 11 February 2021
         
of the Joint Committee set up under the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and Japan related to the registration of a conformity assessment body under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment [2021/433]


THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and Japan and, in particular, Article 8(3)(a) and Article 9(1)(b) thereof,

Whereas the Joint Committee is to take a Decision to register a conformity assessment body or bodies under a Sectoral Annex,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:








1.


The conformity assessment body indicated below is registered under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment of the Agreement, for the products and conformity assessment procedures as indicated below. This registration concerns an extension of scope of a designated CAB under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment in order to include Telecommunication Business Law, in addition to Radio Law.





Name, acronym and contact details of the Conformity Assessment Body:
Name: CETECOM GmbH
Address: Im Teelbruch 116, D-45219 Essen, GERMANY
               
Telephone number: +49 20549519404
Fax number: +49 20549519150
Email address: francis.lima@cetecom.com
URL address: http://www.cetecom.com
Contact person of the designated CAB: Francis Lima









Scope of registration in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures:
For Telecommunication Business Law






—


Terminal equipment for the purpose of calls (all equipment)










—


Terminal equipment except the preceding item (all equipment)




For Radio Law:






—


Specified Radio Equipment specified in Article 38-2-2, paragraph (1), items i), ii), iii) of the Radio Law


















2.


This Decision replaces any previous registration of the said conformity assessment body as for the applicable laws, regulations and administrative provisions specified in paragraph 1.










3.


This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by the Co-Chairs. The Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.








Tokyo, 23 December 2020
            

On behalf of Japan

Daisuke NIHEI
            


Brussels, 11 February 2021
            

On behalf of the European Union

Lucian CERNAT
State aid – Decision to raise no objections 2021/C 48/06
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, cultural event, culture industry, epidemic








C_2021048EN.01000801.xml










11.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/8






State aid – Decision to raise no objections
(2021/C 48/06)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:






Date of adoption of the decision


4 November 2020




Case No


85605




Decision No


126/20/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Renewal and amendments of the compensation scheme for the cancellation or postponement of cultural events, and re-notification of the scheme for the cancellation or postponement of cultural events for the period approved by Decision No 091/20/COL




Legal basis


The national legal basis for the September period is set out in the Regulation on a temporary compensation scheme in connection with cancellations, closings or postponements of events planned held in September 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak.
The national legal basis for the period 1 October to 31 December 2020 is set out in the Regulation on a temporary compensation scheme in connection with cancellations or closings of events planned in October to December 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak.
The legal basis for the increased budget for the period 1 May to 31 August is the budget proposition 142 S (2019-2020) and the Parliament’s decision 9 October 2020.




Type of measure


Increase of budget and Scheme




Objective


To compensate eligible beneficiaries for damage related to the cancellation or postponement of cultural events due to the COVID-19 virus and to gradually phase out the scheme.




Form of aid


Grants




Budget


NOK 425 588 244  increase of the budget approved by Decision No 091/20/COL
Budget of NOK 200 million for the renewed scheme (September-December)




Duration


1 September 2020 - 31 December 2020




Economic sectors


Culture




Name and address of the granting authority







Arts Council Norway




Postboks 4808  Nydalen




0422 Oslo




NORWAY








The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/243 of 11 February 2021 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Vinagre del Condado de Huelva’ (PDO)
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Andalusia, Spain, condiment, designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2021057EN.01007701.xml










18.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 57/77








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2021/243
of 11 February 2021
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Vinagre del Condado de Huelva’ (PDO)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Spain’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Vinagre del Condado de Huelva’, registered under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 984/2011 (2).












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Vinagre del Condado de Huelva’ (PDO) are hereby approved.


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, 11 February 2021.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 984/2011 of 30 September 2011 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Vinagre del Condado de Huelva (PDO)] (OJ L 260, 5.10.2011, p. 7).

(3)  
            OJ C 298, 8.9.2020, p. 34.
Decision No 3/EC/2020 of 11 February 2020 of the Joint Committee set up under the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and Japan related to the registration of a conformity assessment body under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment [2021/434]
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: European Union, Japan, Joint Committee
Subjects: EC conformity marking, Japan, agreement (EU), approval, mutual recognition principle, radio equipment, telecommunications equipment








L_2021086EN.01001901.xml










12.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 86/19








            DECISION No 3/EC/2020
of 11 February 2020
         
of the Joint Committee set up under the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and Japan related to the registration of a conformity assessment body under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment [2021/434]


THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and Japan and, in particular, Article 8(3)(a) and Article 9(1)(b) thereof,

Whereas the Joint Committee is to take a Decision to register a conformity assessment body or bodies under a Sectoral Annex,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:








1.


The conformity assessment body indicated below is registered under the Sectoral Annex on Telecommunications Terminal Equipment and Radio Equipment of the Agreement, for the products and conformity assessment procedures as indicated below.





Name, acronym and contact details of the Conformity Assessment Body:
Name: KL-Certification GmbH
Address: Kaiserstrasse 170-174, D-66386 St. Ingbert, GERMANY
               
Telephone number: +49 6894 38938 66
Fax number: +49 6894 38938 99
E-mail address: o.kneip@kl-certification.de
URL address: www.kl-certification.de
Contact person of the designated CAB: Oliver Kneip









Scope of registration in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures:
For Telecommunication Business Law:
Registered Approval Body






—


Terminal equipment for the purpose of calls (all equipment)










—


Terminal equipment except the preceding item (all equipment)




For Radio Law:
Registered Certification Body






—


Specified Radio Equipment specified in Article 38-2-2, paragraph (1), items 1), 2), 3) of the Radio Law


















2.


This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by the Co-Chairs. The Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.








Tokyo, 23 December 2020
            

On behalf of Japan

Daisuke NIHEI
            


Brussels, 11 February 2021
            

On behalf of the European Union

Lucian CERNAT
Case T-176/20: Order of the General Court of 11 February 2021 — Sam McKnight v EUIPO — Carolina Herrera (COOL GIRL) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, hairdressing and beauty care, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021138EN.01003301.xml










19.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/33






Order of the General Court of 11 February 2021 — Sam McKnight v EUIPO — Carolina Herrera (COOL GIRL)
(Case T-176/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2021/C 138/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sam McKnight Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Sipos, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Carolina Herrera Ltd (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: E. Stoyanov Edissonov and I. Robledo McClymont, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 January 2020 (Case R 689/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Carolina Herrera and Sam McKnight.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Sam McKnight Ltd and Carolina Herrera Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Corrigendum to the Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on cooperation on, and protection of, geographical indications, signed at Beijing on 14 September 2020 (Official Journal of the European Union L 408 I of 4 December 2020)
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: China, European Union
Subjects: China, cooperation agreement (EU), designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2021048EN.01000401.xml










11.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 48/4







Corrigendum to the Agreement between the European Union and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on cooperation on, and protection of, geographical indications, signed at Beijing on 14 September 2020
         

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 408 I of 4 December 2020
)


On page 23, in Annex IV (‘Geographical indications of products originating in the European Union referred to in Article 2(3)’), point 69 in the table:
for:









‘69.


Grana Padano


帕达诺干奶酪


Cheese’





read:









‘69.


Grana Padano


哥瑞纳-帕达诺奶酪


Cheese’
Case C-85/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark (Austria) lodged on 11 February 2021 — WY
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, foreign national, free movement of workers, nationality, principle of proportionality








C_2021148EN.01000801.xml










26.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/8






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark (Austria) lodged on 11 February 2021 — WY
(Case C-85/21)
(2021/C 148/10)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: WY

Respondent authority: Steiermärkische Landesregierung

Question referred

Is Article 21 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of an ex lege loss of nationality provided for under national law, and the subsequent loss of citizenship of the Union, it is to be included in the examination of proportionality in each individual case in accordance with the principles of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Tjebbes and Others case (1) and is capable of constituting an obstacle to the loss of nationality in the case where a national has reacquired his or her previous nationality by means of a declaration of reacquisition, and the threatened loss of citizenship of the Union has a significant impact on his or her family life and professional life?


(1)  EU:C:2019:189.
Case T-92/20: Order of the General Court of 11 February 2021 — Fryč v Commission (Non-contractual liability — State aid — Block exemption regulations — Aid programme granted by the Czech authorities in favour of certain undertakings — Commission decision approving that programme — Action for annulment dismissed as being out of time — Damage allegedly caused by acts of the Commission and the EU Courts — Limitation period — Action in part manifestly inadmissible — Causal link — Action in part manifestly unfounded in law)
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Czechia, EU institution, State aid, competition policy, damages, operation of the Institutions, operational programme, principle of proportionality, restriction on competition, right to justice








C_2021138EN.01003201.xml










19.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/32






Order of the General Court of 11 February 2021 — Fryč v Commission
(Case T-92/20) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - State aid - Block exemption regulations - Aid programme granted by the Czech authorities in favour of certain undertakings - Commission decision approving that programme - Action for annulment dismissed as being out of time - Damage allegedly caused by acts of the Commission and the EU Courts - Limitation period - Action in part manifestly inadmissible - Causal link - Action in part manifestly unfounded in law)
(2021/C 138/43)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Petr Fryč (Pardubice, Czech Republic) (represented by: Š. Oharková, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz, C. Georgieva-Kecsmar and K. Walkerová, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of, first, the adoption of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General block exemption Regulation) (OJ 2008 L 214, p. 3), second, the adoption by the Commission of the decision of 3 December 2007 and the failure to publish that decision, third, the shortcomings in the Commission’s handling of the complaints lodged by the applicant between 2016 and 2018 and, fourth, the orders of 5 September 2019, Fryč v Commission (C 230/19 P, not published, EU:C:2019:685), and 15 January 2019, Fryč v Commission (T-513/18, not published, EU:T:2019:22).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene by the Czech Republic.










3.


Mr Petr Fryč shall bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission, with the exception of those relating to the application for leave to intervene.










4.


Mr Petr Fryč and the Commission shall each bear their own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 161, 11.5.2020.
Case C-87/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Romania) lodged on 11 February 2021 — NSV and NM v BT
Date: 2021-02-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: banking, consumer information, financial risk, loan, unfair terms of contract








C_2021206EN.01001301.xml










31.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/13






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Romania) lodged on 11 February 2021 — NSV and NM v BT
(Case C-87/21)
(2021/C 206/16)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: NSV and NM

Respondent: BT

Questions referred







1.


Are Article 1(2), Article 5 [and] Article 4(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC (1) to be interpreted as not excluding from review a term relating to foreign exchange risk which brings within a contract for consideration, based on relationships of strength, a principle expressed by a supplementary rule that is ordinarily applicable to a contract which is free of charge and is intended to place the contracting parties on an equal footing, but has not been assessed by the legislature with a view to striking a reasonable balance between the interests of the seller or supplier and those of the consumer, where the seller or supplier has included that principle in the contract without providing the consumer, at the pre-contractual stage, with information, advice and warnings regarding the particular features of the banking product concerned in terms of the characteristics of the currency of the loan, so that the consumer might understand the economic consequences of the commitment undertaken by him or her?










2.


Is Directive 93/13/EEC to be interpreted as meaning that exclusion is not justified where there is evidence which suggests that the seller or supplier inserted the term in bad faith, knowing that the application of the principle expressed by the supplementary rule was liable to cause a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations, to the detriment of the consumer?






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).