do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-680/20: Order of the General Court of 4 June 2021 — Novelis v Commission
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: aluminium, economic concentration, merger control, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, semi-manufactured goods, subsidiary, waste recycling








C_2021289EN.01005301.xml










19.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 289/53






Order of the General Court of 4 June 2021 — Novelis v Commission
(Case T-680/20) (1)

(2021/C 289/71)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Case C-354/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 4 June 2021 — R.J. R. v Valstybės įmonė Registrų centras
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: inheritance, land register, law of succession, official document, real property








C_2021349EN.01001901.xml










30.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 4 June 2021 — R.J. R. v Valstybės įmonė Registrų centras

(Case C-354/21)
(2021/C 349/24)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: R.J. R.

Respondent: Valstybės įmonė Registrų centras

Question referred

Must point (l) of Article 1(2) and Article 69(5) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession be interpreted as not precluding legal rules of the Member State in which the immovable property is situated under which the rights of ownership can be recorded in the Real Property Register on the basis of a European Certificate of Succession only in the case where all of the details necessary for registration are set out in that European Certificate of Succession?


(1)  OJ 2012 L 201, p. 107.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 3 June 2021 2021/C 212/03
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021212EN.01001001.xml










4.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/10






Euro exchange rates (1)

3 June 2021
(2021/C 212/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2187 




JPY


Japanese yen


133,81 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4365 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85955 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1145 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0961 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1501 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,448 




HUF


Hungarian forint


345,82 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4520 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9220 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,5650 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5792 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4710 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,4551 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6915 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6141 




KRW


South Korean won


1 357,75 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5218 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7910 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5013 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 420,91 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0241 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,208 




RUB


Russian rouble


89,2163 




THB


Thai baht


37,938 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,1894 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,3300 




INR


Indian rupee


88,8755 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-353/21 P: Appeal brought on 4 June 2021 by Ryanair DAC against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 14 April 2021 in Case T-388/20, Ryanair v Commission (Finnair I; Covid-19)
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Finland, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic, equal treatment, freedom to provide services, low cost airline, right of establishment








C_2021349EN.01001802.xml










30.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/18






Appeal brought on 4 June 2021 by Ryanair DAC against the judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 14 April 2021 in Case T-388/20, Ryanair v Commission (Finnair I; Covid-19)
(Case C-353/21 P)
(2021/C 349/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Ryanair DAC (represented by: E. Vahida and F.-C. Laprévote, avocats, S. Rating, abogado, I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, dikigoros, and V. Blanc, avocate)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Kingdom of Spain, French Republic, Republic of Finland

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal;










—


declare in accordance with Articles 263 and 264 TFEU that Commission Decision C(2020) 3387 final of 18 May 2020 on State Aid SA.56809 (2020/N) — Finland — COVID-19: State loan guarantee for Finnair is void; and










—


order the Commission to bear its own costs and pay those incurrent by Ryanair, and order the interveners at first instance and in this appeal (if any) to bear their own costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the appellant relies on five pleas in law.
First plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts in rejecting the Appellant’s plea concerning the infringement of Article 107(3)(b) TFEU.
Second plea in law: the General Court infringed EU law in rejecting the Appellant’s claim that the non-discrimination principle has been unjustifiably violated.
Third plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts regarding the Appellant’s claim on the infringement of the freedom of establishment and the free provision of services.
Fourth plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts regarding the failure to open a formal investigation procedure.
Fifth plea in law: the General Court erred in law and manifestly distorted the facts regarding the failure to state reasons.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/938 of 4 June 2021 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Cerise des coteaux du Ventoux’ (PGI))
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, designation of origin, fresh fruit, labelling, product designation, stone fruit








L_2021205EN.01000301.xml










11.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 205/3








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2021/938
of 4 June 2021
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Cerise des coteaux du Ventoux’ (PGI))


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 Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, France’s application to register the name ‘Cerise des coteaux du Ventoux’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Cerise des coteaux du Ventoux’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Cerise des coteaux du Ventoux’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6 – Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


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, 4 June 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)  
            OJ C 61, 22.2.2021, p. 27.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case C-350/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 June 2021 — Criminal proceedings against Spetsializirana prokuratura
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: criminal proceedings, data protection, fight against crime, judicial review, mobile communication, personal data, protection of communications








C_2021338EN.01001302.xml










23.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/13






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 June 2021 — Criminal proceedings against Spetsializirana prokuratura
(Case C-350/21)
(2021/C 338/16)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Party to the main proceedings

Spetsializirana prokuratura

Questions referred

Is national legislation (Article 251b(1) of the Zakon za elektronnite saobshtenia (Law on electronic communications)) providing for the general and indiscriminate retention of all traffic data (traffic data and location data of users of electronic means of communication) for a period of 6 months in order to fight serious crime compatible with Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58, (1) read in combination with Article 5(1) and recital 11 thereof, provided that the national legislation contains certain safeguards?
Is national legislation (Article 159a of the Nakazatelno-protsesualen kodeks (Code of Criminal Procedure)) which does not limit access to traffic data to what is strictly necessary and does not grant the persons whose traffic data are accessed by the law enforcement authorities the right to be notified thereof, provided that that does not impede criminal proceedings, or the right to a legal remedy against unlawful access compatible with Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58, read in combination with Article 5(1) and recital 11 thereof?


(1)  Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ 2002 L 201, p. 37, Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 13 Volume 036 P. 63).
Case T-314/21: Action brought on 4 June 2021 — TA v Parliament
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: servant (EU), staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2021289EN.01005001.xml










19.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 289/50






Action brought on 4 June 2021 — TA v Parliament
(Case T-314/21)
(2021/C 289/67)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: TA (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present action admissible;










—


order the annulment of the applicant’s appraisal report for 2019 and, in so far as necessary, the annulment of Mr Welle’s decision of 29 March 2021 in response to the complaint within the meaning of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations;










—


order the defendant to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging an infringement of Article 43 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’), Article 5(2) and Article 6(11) of the internal rules on the application of the general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, and infringement of Articles 15(2) and 87(1) of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union. The applicant submits, in particular, that, by failing to take into account the absence of objectives set for 2019, the assessors disregarded the abovementioned provisions.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging material inaccuracies in the facts which gave rise to a manifest error of assessment.
Case C-392/20: Order of the President of the Court of 4 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Mokotowa w Warszawie — Poland) — European Chemicals Agency v Miejskie Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej sp. z o.o.
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Central Bank, European Chemicals Agency, European Commission, civil procedure, claim, decision (EU), enforcement of ruling, jurisdiction








C_2021357EN.01001601.xml










6.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/16






Order of the President of the Court of 4 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Mokotowa w Warszawie — Poland) — European Chemicals Agency v Miejskie Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej sp. z o.o.
(Case C-392/20) (1)

(2021/C 357/21)
Language of the case: Polish
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 423, 7.12.2020.
Case C-346/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 4 June 2021 — ING Luxembourg SA v VX
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: establishment, form, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, judicial proceedings








C_2021382EN.01001301.xml










20.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/13






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação do Porto (Portugal) lodged on 4 June 2021 — ING Luxembourg SA v VX
(Case C-346/21)
(2021/C 382/16)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação do Porto

Parties to the main proceedings


Defendant at first instance and appellant at second instance: ING Luxembourg SA

Applicant at first instance and respondent at second instance: VX

Questions referred







1.


May Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 (1) be interpreted as meaning that service by registered letter that is effected on a company having its registered office in another Member State, without use of the form set out in Annex II to Regulation No 1393/2007, may, in the circumstances of the present case, be regarded as valid?










2.


May Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 and the principles of EU law therein be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the application of Article 191(2) of the Portuguese Código de Processo Civil (Code of Civil Procedure) to the present case, in so far as that provision states that a pleading of nullity of service must be lodged within a certain time limit (namely, the time limit laid down for lodging a defence)?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents), and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 (OJ 2007 L 324, p. 79).
Case C-348/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 June 2021 — Criminal proceedings against HYA and Others
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: charge, criminal proceedings, evidence, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2021338EN.01001202.xml










23.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 June 2021 — Criminal proceedings against HYA and Others
(Case C-348/21)
(2021/C 338/14)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

HYA and Others

Question referred

Is a national law which provides that the right of an accused person to be present in proceedings is safeguarded and the public prosecutor’s office properly discharges its obligation to prove the guilt of the accused person compatible with Articles 8(1) and 6(1) of Directive 2016/343, (1) read in conjunction with recitals 33 and 34 thereof, and the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter if the testimony given at the pre-trial stage of the proceedings by witnesses who cannot be examined for objective reasons is introduced at the trial stage of the criminal proceedings, whereby those witnesses were examined solely by the prosecution and without the participation of the defence, but before a judge, and the prosecution could have provided the defence with the opportunity to participate in that examination at the pre-trial stage, but did not do so?


(1)  Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings (OJ 2016 L 65, p. 1).
Case C-349/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 June 2021 — Criminal proceedings against HYA and Others
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: criminal proceedings, data protection, mobile communication, personal data, protection of communications, right to justice, rights of the defence, surveillance








C_2021338EN.01001301.xml










23.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/13






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 4 June 2021 — Criminal proceedings against HYA and Others
(Case C-349/21)
(2021/C 338/15)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

HYA and Others

Questions referred

Is a practice of national courts in criminal proceedings whereby the court authorises the interception, recording and storage of telephone conversations of suspects by means of a pre-drafted, generic text template in which it is merely asserted, without any individualisation, that the statutory provisions have been complied with compatible with Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58, (1) read in conjunction with Article 5(1) and recital 11 thereof?
If not, is it contrary to EU law if the national law is interpreted as meaning that information obtained as a result of such authorisation is used to prove the charges brought?


(1)  Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37, Special edition in Bulgarian: Chapter 13 Volume 036 P. 63).
Case T-315/21: Action brought on 4 June 2021 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Nordesta (APIAL)
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, food supplement, lighting equipment, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, toiletries, trade-mark law








C_2021289EN.01005002.xml










19.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 289/50






Action brought on 4 June 2021 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Nordesta (APIAL)
(Case T-315/21)
(2021/C 289/68)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: I. Miralles Llorca, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Nordesta GmbH (Munich, Germany)

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 APIAL — Application for registration No 17 958 998

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2021 in Case R 1560/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


revoke the contested decision and reject the granting of the European Union trade mark Noo17 958 998 APIAL for all goods in class 3, 4 and 5;










—


order EUIPO and, in case Nordesta GmbH decides to intervene in the present proceedings, Nordesta GmbH, to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-351/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Justice de paix du canton de Forest (Belgium) lodged on 4 June 2021 — ZG v Beobank SA
Date: 2021-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disclosure of information, electronic money, intra-EU payment, payment, payment system, provision of services








C_2021338EN.01001401.xml










23.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Justice de paix du canton de Forest (Belgium) lodged on 4 June 2021 — ZG v Beobank SA
(Case C-351/21)
(2021/C 338/17)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Justice de paix du canton de Forest

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ZG

Defendant: Beobank SA

Questions referred







1.


Under Article 38(a) of Directive 2007/64/EC, (1) is the payment service provider under a best endeavours obligation or an obligation of result regarding the provision of ‘information relating to the payee’?










2.


Does the ‘information relating to the payee’ referred to in that provision include information from which the natural or legal person that received the payment can be identified?






(1)  Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the internal market amending Directives 97/7/EC, 2002/65/EC, 2005/60/EC and 2006/48/EC and repealing Directive 97/5/EC (OJ 2007 L 319, p. 1).