do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-361/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske (Croatia) lodged on 8 June 2021 — IC v PET-PROM d.o.o.
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: higher court, right to justice, ruling








C_2021471EN.01001502.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/15






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske (Croatia) lodged on 8 June 2021 — IC v PET-PROM d.o.o.
(Case C-361/21)
(2021/C 471/22)
Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: IC

Defendant: PET-PROM d.o.o.

Questions referred







1.


Is the rule laid down in the second part of the first sentence and in the second sentence of Article 177(3) of the Sudski poslovnik (Rules of Procedure of the Courts, Narodne novine, br. 37/14, 49/14, 8/15, 35/15, 123/15, 45/16, 29/17, 33/17, 34/17, 57/17, 101/18, 119/18, 81/19, 128/19, 39/20 and 47/20), which provides that ‘, a case before a court of second instance shall be deemed to be closed on the date on which the decision is sent from the court office, after the case has been returned by the Registration Service. The Registration Service shall be required to return the file to the court office as promptly as possible after receipt thereof. The decision shall then be notified within a further period of eight days’, to be considered compatible with Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?










2.


Is Article 40 of the Zakon o sudovima (Law on judicial bodies), which provides that ‘the legal position adopted at the meeting of all the judges or of a section of the Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske (Supreme Court, Croatia), of the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske (Commercial Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki upravni sud Republike Hrvatske (Administrative Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki kazneni sud Republike Hrvatske (Criminal Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki prekršajni sud Republike Hrvatske (Higher Misdemeanour Court, Croatia) and of the meeting of a section of a Županijski sud (County Court, Croatia) shall be binding on all the chambers or judges at second instance of that section or court’, compatible with Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?
European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2021 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment (07234/1/2021 — C9-0196/2021 — 2018/0258(COD))
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, Committee on Budgets, Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on International Trade, Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, European Parliament
Subjects: customs inspection, external border of the EU, fund (EU)








C_2022067EN.01018501.xml










8.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 67/185






P9_TA(2021)0271
Establishing the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment ***II
European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2021 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment (07234/1/2021 — C9-0196/2021 — 2018/0258(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)
(2022/C 67/29)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Council position at first reading (07234/1/2021 — C9-0196/2021),










—


having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 17 October 2018 (1),










—


having regard to its position at first reading (2) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0474),










—


having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 74(4) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A9-0196/2021),












1.


Approves the Council position at first reading;












2.


Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;












3.


Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;












4.


Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;












5.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.






(1)  OJ C 62, 15.2.2019, p. 67.

(2)  OJ C 158, 30.4.2021, p. 133.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 7 June 2021 2021/C 218/03
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021218EN.01000301.xml










8.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 218/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

7 June 2021
(2021/C 218/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2162 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,98 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4369 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85825 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,0552 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0934 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,0483 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,400 




HUF


Hungarian forint


345,91 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4662 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9234 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,4902 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5678 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4681 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,4355 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6832 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6093 




KRW


South Korean won


1 351,23 




ZAR


South African rand


16,3923 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7795 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5005 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 325,10 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0205 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,930 




RUB


Russian rouble


88,6023 




THB


Thai baht


37,933 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,1389 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,0450 




INR


Indian rupee


88,5305 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-318/21: Action brought on 8 June 2021 — KF v BEI
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: disabled person, indemnification, pension scheme, staff regulations (EU), worker with disabilities








C_2021297EN.01004702.xml










26.7.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 297/47






Action brought on 8 June 2021 — KF v BEI
(Case T-318/21)
(2021/C 297/59)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: KF (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the defendant’s decision of 13 October 2020;










—


annul the defendant’s decision of 9 March 2021 rejecting the applicant’s request for an administrative review of the defendant’s decision of 13 October 2020;










—


grant compensation for the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant; 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 violation of Article 8(1), Article 46(1) and Article 51(1) of the defendant’s Pension Scheme Regulations and a manifest error of appreciation of the legal concept of invalidity.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging violation of Article 34 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and a violation of the duty of care.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging violation of the principle of good administration.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging lack of impartiality.










5.


The applicant also considers that the illegalities set out in the appeal amount to faults committed by the defendant. The applicant therefore seeks compensation for the moral damage arising from the contested decision.
Case T-663/20: Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — One Voice v ECHA (Action for annulment — REACH — Substance homosalate — Exclusive use for the manufacture of cosmetic products — Compliance check of registrations — Article 41(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Time limit for bringing an action — Article 21(5) of Regulation (EC) No 771/2008 — Article 59 of the Rules of Procedure — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: animal experimentation, chemical product, chemicals legislation, cosmetic product, interpretation of the law, limitation of legal proceedings, product safety








C_2021310EN.01003501.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/35






Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — One Voice v ECHA
(Case T-663/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - REACH - Substance homosalate - Exclusive use for the manufacture of cosmetic products - Compliance check of registrations - Article 41(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Time limit for bringing an action - Article 21(5) of Regulation (EC) No 771/2008 - Article 59 of the Rules of Procedure - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 310/46)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: One Voice (Strasbourg, France) (represented by: A. Ghersi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (represented by: W. Broere and L. Bolzonello, acting as Agents, and by S. Raes, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Decision A-009-2018 of the Board of Appeal of ECHA of 18 August 2020, relating to the compliance check of a registration dossier for homosalate.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


One Voice is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Case T-231/20: Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — Price v Council (Action for annulment — Area of freedom, security and justice — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom — Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement on withdrawal — United Kingdom nationals — Loss of EU citizenship — Act not of individual concern — Non-regulatory act — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, United Kingdom, agreement (EU), discrimination on the basis of nationality, free movement of persons, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, ratification of an agreement, withdrawal from the EU








C_2021310EN.01002801.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/28






Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — Price v Council
(Case T-231/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Area of freedom, security and justice - Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom - Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement on withdrawal - United Kingdom nationals - Loss of EU citizenship - Act not of individual concern - Non-regulatory act - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 310/36)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: David Price (Le Dorat, France) (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant): Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, R. Meyer and M. Joséphidès, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment in part of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 7) and of Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene submitted by the European Commission.










3.


Mr David Price is ordered to bear, in addition to his own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union, including those regarding the application for interim measures, with the exception of those related to the application for leave to intervene.










4.


Mr Price, the Council and the Commission shall each bear their own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/1528 of 8 June 2021 correcting the Swedish language version of Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Translation, European Commission
Subjects: dual-use good, export (EU), export licence, export monitoring, intra-EU trade, trade restriction, transit








L_2021329EN.01000601.xml










17.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 329/6








            COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2021/1528
of 8 June 2021
         
correcting the Swedish language version of Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 of 5 May 2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items (1), and in particular Article 15(3) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Swedish language version of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 contains errors in Category 1, Section 1A005.b; Category 3, Section 3B001.a.3, Category 5, Part 2, Section 5A002.a, Note 2, point (e) and Note 2 j, ‘Technical Notes’, point 1; Category 5, Part 2, Section 5A003.a and Category 9, Section 9A010.c that affect the definitions of the products in question.












(2)


The Swedish language version of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 should therefore be corrected accordingly. The other language versions are not affected,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

(does not concern the English language)



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, 8 June 2021.


For the Commission


The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 134, 29.5.2009, p. 1.
Case T-323/21: Action brought on 8 June 2021 — Castel Frères v EUIPO — Shanghai Panati (Representation of Chinese characters)
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, still wine, trade-mark law








C_2021310EN.01003701.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/37






Action brought on 8 June 2021 — Castel Frères v EUIPO — Shanghai Panati (Representation of Chinese characters)
(Case T-323/21)
(2021/C 310/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Castel Frères (Blanquefort, France) (represented by: T. de Haan, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Shanghai Panati Co. (Shanghai, China)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark (Representation of Chinese characters) — European Union trade mark No 6 785 109

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 March 2021 in Case R 753/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to bear the costs, including those incurred by the applicant before the Office’s Fifth Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 58(1)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-664/20: Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — One Voice v ECHA (Action for annulment — REACH — Substance 2-ethylhexyl salicylate — Exclusive use for the manufacture of cosmetic products — Compliance check of registrations — Article 41(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Time limit for bringing an action — Article 21(5) of Regulation (EC) No 771/2008 — Article 59 of the Rules of Procedure — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: animal experimentation, chemical product, chemicals legislation, cosmetic product, interpretation of the law, limitation of legal proceedings, product safety








C_2021310EN.01003502.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/35






Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — One Voice v ECHA
(Case T-664/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - REACH - Substance 2-ethylhexyl salicylate - Exclusive use for the manufacture of cosmetic products - Compliance check of registrations - Article 41(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Time limit for bringing an action - Article 21(5) of Regulation (EC) No 771/2008 - Article 59 of the Rules of Procedure - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 310/47)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: One Voice (Strasbourg, France) (represented by: A. Ghersi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (represented by: W. Broere and L. Bolzonello, acting as Agents, and by S. Raes, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Decision A-010-2018 of the Board of Appeal of ECHA of 18 August 2020, relating to the compliance check of a registration dossier for 2-ethylhexyl salicylate.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


One Voice is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Case T-252/20: Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — Silver and Others v Council (Action for annulment — Area of freedom, security and justice — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom — Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement on withdrawal — United Kingdom nationals — Loss of EU citizenship — Act not of individual concern — Non-regulatory act — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, United Kingdom, agreement (EU), area of freedom, security and justice, discrimination on the basis of nationality, fundamental rights, principle of proportionality, ratification of an agreement, withdrawal from the EU








C_2021310EN.01002901.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/29






Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — Silver and Others v Council
(Case T-252/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Area of freedom, security and justice - Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom - Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement on withdrawal - United Kingdom nationals - Loss of EU citizenship - Act not of individual concern - Non-regulatory act - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 310/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Joshua Silver (Bicester, United Kingdom) and the six other applicants whose names are set out in the annex (represented by: P. Tridimas, Barrister, D. Harrison and A. von Westernhagen, Solicitors)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, R. Meyer and J. Ciantar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking partial annulment of Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications to intervene submitted by the European Commission, British in Europe, Plaid Cymru — The Party of Wales, European Democracy Lab, ECIT and European Alternatives Ltd.










3.


Mr Joshua Silver and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex shall, in addition to bearing their own costs, pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union, with the exception of those relating to the applications to intervene.










4.


Mr Silver and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex, the Council, the Commission, British in Europe, Plaid Cymru — The Party of Wales, European Democracy Lab, ECIT and European Alternatives Ltd shall each bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.