do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-48/20: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — UAB ‘P.’ v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w B. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 203 — Taxes improperly invoiced — Good faith on the part of the issuer of the invoice — Risk of loss of tax revenue — Obligations of the Member States to provide for the possibility of adjusting tax improperly invoiced — Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, interpretation of the law, invoicing, principle of proportionality, provision of services, supply, tax exemption, tax offence, tax rebate, trade intermediary








C_2021182EN.01001901.xml










10.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/19






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — UAB ‘P.’ v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w B.
(Case C-48/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 203 - Taxes improperly invoiced - Good faith on the part of the issuer of the invoice - Risk of loss of tax revenue - Obligations of the Member States to provide for the possibility of adjusting tax improperly invoiced - Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)
(2021/C 182/26)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: UAB ‘P.’

Respondent: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w B.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 203 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax and the principles of proportionality and neutrality of VAT must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not allow a taxable person acting in good faith to adjust invoices improperly indicating VAT following the initiation of a tax investigation procedure, even though the recipient of those invoices would have been entitled to reimbursement of that tax if the transactions which were the subject of those invoices had been duly declared.


(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10193 — OTPP/IFM/Enwave Energy Canada) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 91/08
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Australia, Canada, air conditioning, economic concentration, energy production, heating, investment company, merger control, pension scheme








C_2021091EN.01003501.xml










18.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/35






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10193 — OTPP/IFM/Enwave Energy Canada)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 91/08)

1.   
On 11 March 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:






—


Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan (‘OTPP’, Canada),










—


IFM Investors Pty Ltd. (‘IFM’, Australia),










—


The Canadian business of Enwave Energy Corporation (‘Enwave Energy Canada’, Canada).




OTPP and IFM acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Enwave Energy Canada.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for OTPP: the administration of pension benefits and the investment of pension plan assets of teachers in the Canadian province of Ontario,










—


for IFM: global investment management across infrastructure, listed equities, private capital and debt investments, on behalf of a number of Australian not-for-profit pension funds,










—


for Enwave Energy Canada: providing district heating, cooling and generation services to customers located in Canada.






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.10193 — OTPP/IFM/Enwave Energy Canada
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.
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.): 0,00 % on 1 March 2021 Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 17 March 2021 2021/C 91/05
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, financing, interest, money








C_2021091EN.01003201.xml










18.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/32






Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):
0,00 % on 1 March 2021
Euro exchange rates (2)

17 March 2021
(2021/C 91/05)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1907 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,02 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4360 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85668 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1355 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1047 




ISK


Iceland króna


151,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1213 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,159 




HUF


Hungarian forint


367,74 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6136 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8874 




TRY


Turkish lira


8,9498 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5427 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4852 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2476 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6618 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6036 




KRW


South Korean won


1 346,65 




ZAR


South African rand


17,7180 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7435 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5765 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 216,30 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9075 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,982 




RUB


Russian rouble


87,8245 




THB


Thai baht


36,656 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,7299 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,6882 




INR


Indian rupee


86,4290 






(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Notice of open competition 2021/C 91/07
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: assistant, competition (EU), job vacancy, nuclear safety, recruitment








C_2021091EN.01003401.xml










18.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/34






NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
(2021/C 91/07)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:
EPSO/AST/149/21 - NUCLEAR INSPECTORS (AST 3)
The Notice of Competition is published in 24 languages in 
Official Journal of the European Union C 91 A of 18 March 2021.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: https://epso.europa.eu/
Case C-440/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 March 2021 — Pometon SpA v European Commission (Appeal — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European steel abrasives market — Participation in bilateral and multilateral contacts with the aim of coordinating prices throughout the European Economic Area (EEA) — ‘Hybrid’ procedure having led successively to the adoption of a settlement decision and a decision made under the ordinary procedure — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 41 — Principle of impartiality of the European Commission — Article 48 — Presumption of innocence — Obligation to state reasons — Single and continuous infringement — Duration of the infringement — Equal treatment — Unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Economic Area, cartel, control of restrictive practices, equal treatment, judicial review, metallurgical industry, price agreement, rights of the defence, sanction (EU), steel








C_2021182EN.01000602.xml










10.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/6






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 18 March 2021 — Pometon SpA v European Commission
(Case C-440/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European steel abrasives market - Participation in bilateral and multilateral contacts with the aim of coordinating prices throughout the European Economic Area (EEA) - ‘Hybrid’ procedure having led successively to the adoption of a settlement decision and a decision made under the ordinary procedure - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 41 - Principle of impartiality of the European Commission - Article 48 - Presumption of innocence - Obligation to state reasons - Single and continuous infringement - Duration of the infringement - Equal treatment - Unlimited jurisdiction)
(2021/C 182/08)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Pometon SpA (represented by: E. Fabrizi, V. Veneziano and A. Molinaro, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented: initially by P. Rossi and T. Vecchi, and subsequently by P. Rossi and C. Sjödin, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside paragraphs 2 and 4 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 28 March 2019, Pometon v Commission (T-433/16, EU:T:2019:201);










2.


Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;










3.


Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Pometon SpA in Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2016) 3121 final of 25 May 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39792 — Steel Abrasives) at EUR 2 633 895;










4.


Orders Pometon SpA and the European Commission to bear their own costs relating to the appeal proceedings and the proceedings at first instance.






(1)  OJ C 255, 29.7.2019.
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 18 March 2021 concerning a draft decision in Case AT.40023 – Cross-border access to pay-TV Rapporteur: Poland (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 184/05
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: EU competition policy, audiovisual industry, broadcasting, control of restrictive practices, pay television, provision of services, regulation of telecommunications, restriction on competition








C_2021184EN.01000501.xml










12.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/5






Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 18 March 2021 concerning a draft decision in Case AT.40023 – Cross-border access to pay-TV
Rapporteur: Poland
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 184/05)






1.


The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission to withdraw its decision of 7 March 2019, notified under document C(2019) 1772 final, by adopting the draft withdrawal decision, communicated to the Advisory Committee, under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.










2.


The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10156 — TIAA/AP1/AP2/GPIF/Target) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 102/01
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, investment company, merger control, pension scheme, real estate business








C_2021102EN.01000101.xml










24.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10156 — TIAA/AP1/AP2/GPIF/Target)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 102/01)
On 18 March 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 32021M10156. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10192 — Linde/Hyosung/JVs) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 103/01
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical engineering, gas industry, hydrogen production, merger control








C_2021103EN.01000101.xml










25.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10192 — Linde/Hyosung/JVs)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 103/01)
On 18 March 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 32021M10192. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-388/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — MK v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Direct taxation — Tax on capital gains from immovable property — Free movement of capital — Basis for assessment of tax — Discrimination — Option to be taxed according to the same arrangements as residents — Compliance with EU law)
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: basis of tax assessment, capital gains tax, direct tax, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, free movement of capital, real property, residence, taxpayer, transfer of property








C_2021182EN.01000402.xml










10.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/4






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — MK v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-388/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Direct taxation - Tax on capital gains from immovable property - Free movement of capital - Basis for assessment of tax - Discrimination - Option to be taxed according to the same arrangements as residents - Compliance with EU law)
(2021/C 182/05)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: MK

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Article 63 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 65 TFEU, must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State which, in order to permit the capital gains realised from the transfer of immovable property situated in that Member State, by a taxable person resident in another Member State, not to be subject to a tax burden greater than that which would be applied to capital gains realised from the same type of transaction by a person resident in the first Member State, makes the taxation regime applicable dependent upon the choice made by that taxable person.


(1)  OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Case C-578/19: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom — United Kingdom) — X v Kuoni Travel Ltd (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 90/314/EEC — Article 5(2), third indent — Package travel, package holidays and package tours — Contract concerning package travel concluded between a travel organiser and a consumer — Liability of the travel organiser for the proper performance of obligations arising from the contract by other suppliers of services — Damage resulting from the acts of an employee of a supplier of services — Exemption from liability — Event that cannot be foreseen or forestalled by the travel organiser or the supplier of services — Concept of a ‘supplier of services’)
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, damage, package travel, provision of services, staff








C_2021182EN.01001001.xml










10.5.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/10






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom — United Kingdom) — X v Kuoni Travel Ltd
(Case C-578/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 90/314/EEC - Article 5(2), third indent - Package travel, package holidays and package tours - Contract concerning package travel concluded between a travel organiser and a consumer - Liability of the travel organiser for the proper performance of obligations arising from the contract by other suppliers of services - Damage resulting from the acts of an employee of a supplier of services - Exemption from liability - Event that cannot be foreseen or forestalled by the travel organiser or the supplier of services - Concept of a ‘supplier of services’)
(2021/C 182/13)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: X

Respondent: Kuoni Travel Ltd

Intervener: ABTA Ltd

Operative part of the judgment

The third indent of Article 5(2) of Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours, in so far as it provides for a ground for exemption from liability of an organiser of package travel for the proper performance of the obligations arising from a contract relating to such travel, concluded between that organiser and a consumer and governed by that directive, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of non-performance or improper performance of those obligations, which is the result of the actions of an employee of a supplier of services performing that contract:






—


that employee cannot be regarded as a supplier of services for the purposes of the application of that provision, and










—


the organiser cannot be exempted from its liability arising from such non-performance or improper performance, pursuant to that provision.






(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Calls for proposals and related activities under the EIC Work Programme 2021 under Horizon Europe - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2021-2027) 2021/C 91/06
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission
Subjects: EU office or agency, Framework Programme for Research and Development, action programme, innovation, investment, investment company, invitation to tender, research and development








C_2021091EN.01003301.xml










18.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/33






Calls for proposals and related activities under the EIC Work Programme 2021 under Horizon Europe - the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2021-2027)
(2021/C 91/06)
Notice is hereby given of the launch of calls for proposals and related activities under the EIC Work Programme 2021 under Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2021-2027).
The Commission has adopted the EIC Work Programme 2021 by Decision C(2021) 1510 of 17 March 2021.
Proposals are invited for these calls. The EIC Work Programme 2021, including deadlines and budgets, is available through the Funding & Tender opportunities website along with information on the modalities of the calls and related activities and the information for applicants on how to submit proposals:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/home
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10121 — Platinum Equity Group/Ingram Micro) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 102/02
Date: 2021-03-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: cloud computing, economic concentration, electronic commerce, information technology, logistics, merger control








C_2021102EN.01000201.xml










24.3.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10121 — Platinum Equity Group/Ingram Micro)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 102/02)
On 18 March 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 32021M10121. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.