do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-105/21: Action brought on 19 February 2021 –Kanyama v Council
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, rights of the defence








C_2021128EN.01004501.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/45






Action brought on 19 February 2021 –Kanyama v Council
(Case T-105/21)
(2021/C 128/54)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Célestin Kanyama (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 4 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 4 in the annex to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/21, Boshab v Council.
Decision (EU) 2021/323 of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 19 February 2021 appointing four Judges and an Advocate-General to the Court of Justice
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: Representatives of the Governments of the Member States
Subjects: Court of Justice (EU), appointment of members, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








L_2021064EN.01000401.xml










24.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 64/4








            DECISION (EU) 2021/323 OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES
         
of 19 February 2021
         
appointing four Judges and an Advocate-General to the Court of Justice


THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 19 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 253 and 255 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The terms of office of 14 Judges and six Advocates-General of the Court of Justice will expire on 6 October 2021.












(2)


Appointments to these posts should therefore be made for the term of office starting on 7 October 2021 and expiring on 6 October 2027.












(3)


Mr Miroslav GAVALEC and Ms Octavia SPINEANU-MATEI have been nominated for a first term of office as Judge of the Court of Justice.












(4)


It has been proposed that the terms of office of Mr Niilo JÄÄSKINEN and Mr Lars BAY LARSEN as Judges of the Court of Justice be renewed.












(5)


It has been proposed that the term of office of Ms Juliane KOKOTT as Advocate-General of the Court of Justice be renewed.












(6)


The panel set up under Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given a favourable opinion on the suitability of those candidates to perform the duties of Judge or Advocate-General of the Court of Justice,





HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following are hereby appointed Judges to the Court of Justice for the period from 7 October 2021 to 6 October 2027:






—


Mr Miroslav GAVALEC,










—


Ms Octavia SPINEANU-MATEI,










—


Mr Niilo JÄÄSKINEN,










—


Mr Lars BAY LARSEN.






Article 2
Ms Juliane KOKOTT is hereby appointed Advocate-General to the Court of Justice for the period from 7 October 2021 to 6 October 2027.


Article 3
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, 19 February 2021.


The President

N. BRITO
Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 March 2021 (Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1.)) 2021/C 59/06
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, State aid, interest, reimbursement of aid








C_2021059EN.01000701.xml










19.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 59/7






Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 March 2021


(Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (1))

(2021/C 59/06)
Base rates calculated in accordance with the Communication from the Commission on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates (OJ C 14, 19.1.2008, p. 6.). Depending on the use of the reference rate, the appropriate margins have still to be added as defined in this communication. For the discount rate this means that a margin of 100 basis points has to be added. The Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 of 30 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 foresees that, unless otherwise provided for in a specific decision, the recovery rate will also be calculated by adding 100 basis points to the base rate.
Modified rates are indicated in bold.
Previous table published in OJ C 30, 27.1.2021, p. 4.


































From


To


AT


BE


BG


CY


CZ


DE


DK


EE


EL


ES


FI


FR


HR


HU


IE


IT


LT


LU


LV


MT


NL


PL


PT


RO


SE


SI


SK


UK




1.3.2021


…


-0,45


-0,45


0,00


-0,45


0,44


-0,45



0,04



-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


0,22


0,80


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45



0,15



-0,45


2,07


-0,02


-0,45


-0,45



0,11





1.2.2021


28.2.2021


-0,45


-0,45


0,00


-0,45


0,44


-0,45



0,05



-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


0,22


0,80


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45


-0,45



0,19



-0,45


2,07



-0,02



-0,45


-0,45



0,12





1.1.2021


31.1.2021



-0,45




-0,45




0,00




-0,45




0,44




-0,45




0,06




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




0,22




0,80




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




-0,45




0,23




-0,45




2,07




0,00




-0,45




-0,45




0,15







(1)  OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1.
Case T-112/21: Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Numbi v Council
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, rights of the defence








C_2021128EN.01004801.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/48






Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Numbi v Council
(Case T-112/21)
(2021/C 128/60)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: John Numbi (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 5 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 5 in the annex to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/21, Boshab v Council.
Case T-106/21: Action brought on 19 February 2021 –Kazembe Musonda v Council
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, rights of the defence








C_2021128EN.01004502.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/45






Action brought on 19 February 2021 –Kazembe Musonda v Council
(Case T-106/21)
(2021/C 128/55)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Jean-Claude Kazembe Musonda (Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 8 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 8 in the annex to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/21, Boshab v Council.
Case T-111/21: Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Ryanair v Commission
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Croatia, State aid, airline, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic, equal treatment, freedom to provide services, right of establishment








C_2021138EN.01004901.xml










19.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/49






Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Ryanair v Commission
(Case T-111/21)
(2021/C 138/65)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: E. Vahida, F-C. Laprévote, V. Blanc, S. Rating and I. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the defendant’s decision of 30 November 2020 on State aid SA.55373 (2020/N) — Croatia — COVID-19: Damage compensation to Croatia Airlines (1); and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant’s decision violated specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law that have underpinned the liberalization of air transport in the EU since the late 1980s (i.e., non-discrimination, the free provision of services and free establishment (2)).










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant misapplied Article 107(2)(b) TFEU and committed a manifest error of assessment in its review of the proportionality of the aid to the damage caused by the COVID-19 crisis.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite serious difficulties and violated the applicant’s procedural rights.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant violated its duty to state reasons.






(1)  OJ 2021 C 17, p. 3.

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community (Recast) (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2008 L 293, p. 3–20).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10064 — AnaCap/Carrefour/Market Pay) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 66/05
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, investment company, merger control, payment, retail trade








C_2021066EN.01003501.xml










26.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 66/35






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10064 — AnaCap/Carrefour/Market Pay)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 66/05)
On 19 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 32021M10064. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-107/21: Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Amisi Kumba v Council
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, rights of the defence








C_2021128EN.01004601.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/46






Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Amisi Kumba v Council
(Case T-107/21)
(2021/C 128/56)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Gabriel Amisi Kumba (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in the annex to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/21, Boshab v Council.
Case T-110/21: Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Kampete v Council
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, rights of the defence








C_2021128EN.01004702.xml










12.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/47






Action brought on 19 February 2021 — Kampete v Council
(Case T-110/21)
(2021/C 128/59)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ilunga Kampete (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 1 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020, in so far as the applicant remains at No 1 in the annex to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/21, Boshab v Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10115 — PAI Partners/Apleona Group) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 65/03
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, land and buildings, merger control, property leasing, provision of services








C_2021065EN.01000301.xml










25.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10115 — PAI Partners/Apleona Group)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 65/03)
On 19 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 32021M10115. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10111 — CVC/Vivartia Holdings) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 59/08
Date: 2021-02-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: catering industry, economic concentration, frozen product, investment company, merger control, milk product, prepared foodstuff, vegetable product








C_2021059EN.01001201.xml










19.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 59/12






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10111 — CVC/Vivartia Holdings)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 59/08)

1.   
On 12 February 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:






—


CVC Capital Partners SICAV-FIS S.A. (‘CVC Capital Partners’, Luxembourg),










—


Vivartia Holdings S.A. (‘Vivartia Holdings’, Greece).




CVC Capital Partners acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Vivartia Holdings.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for CVC Capital Partners: CVC Capital Partners and its subsidiaries manage investment funds and platforms,










—


for Vivartia Holdings: production and sale of various dairy products, juices, mixed frozen, and ready-to-cook vegetable combinations. Vivartia Holdings is also the owner and franchisor of several branded restaurants and coffee shops, and also serves other restaurants, cafés, and pastry shops.






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.10111 — CVC/Vivartia Holdings
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.