do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-392/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Romania) lodged on 24 June 2021 — TJ v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: optical industry, protective equipment, remuneration of work








C_2021391EN.01000802.xml










27.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 391/8






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Romania) lodged on 24 June 2021 — TJ v Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări
(Case C-392/21)
(2021/C 391/13)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant (applicant at first instance): TJ

Respondent (defendant at first instance): Inspectoratul General pentru Imigrări

Questions referred







1.


Is the expression ‘special corrective appliances’, used in Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment, (1) to be interpreted as excluding spectacles with corrective lenses?










2.


Must the expression ‘special corrective appliances’, used in Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC, be understood solely to mean appliances used exclusively at the place of work and/or in the performance of employment duties?










3.


Does the obligation to provide a special corrective appliance, provided for by Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC, refer exclusively to the acquisition of the appliance by the employer, or may it be interpreted more broadly, namely to include an obligation upon the employer to reimburse the costs incurred by the worker in purchasing the appliance him or herself?










4.


Is it consistent with Article 9 of Council Directive 90/270/EEC for an employer to cover such costs by means of a general increase in remuneration which is paid on a continuing basis and referred to as an ‘increase for arduous working conditions’?






(1)  OJ 1990 L 156, p. 14.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.9854 - KHS/FERRUM) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 245/01
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: beverage industry, economic concentration, machinery, merger control, packaging, supply








C_2021245EN.01000101.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/1






Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case M.9854 - KHS/FERRUM)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 245/01)
On 17 May 2021, the European Commission received notification (1) of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) (‘Merger Regulation’).
On 15 June 2021, the notifying parties informed the Commission that they withdrew their notification.


(1)  OJ C 199, 27.5.2021, p. 12.

(2)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 22 June 2021 2021/C 245/08
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021245EN.01000801.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/8






Euro exchange rates (1)

22 June 2021
(2021/C 245/08)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1894 




JPY


Japanese yen


131,50 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4360 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85560 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1570 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0943 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,2198 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,533 




HUF


Hungarian forint


355,16 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5328 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9255 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,3395 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5818 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4726 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2365 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7011 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6009 




KRW


South Korean won


1 350,72 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0431 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7014 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4985 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 196,34 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9497 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,892 




RUB


Russian rouble


87,0550 




THB


Thai baht


37,728 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,9682 




MXN


Mexican peso


24,4812 




INR


Indian rupee


88,3735 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10252 — Transgourmet Group/General Markets Food Iberica) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 245/19
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consumer goods, distributor, economic concentration, food production, foodstuff, merger control, processed food product, retail trade, wholesale trade








C_2021245EN.01003501.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/35






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10252 — Transgourmet Group/General Markets Food Iberica)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 245/19)

1.   
On 15 June 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:






—


General Markets Food Ibérica Group (‘GM Food’, SPAIN), controlled by Bright Food Group (CHINA);










—


Transgourmet Holding AG (‘Transgourmet’, SWITZERLAND), controlled by Coop-Gruppe Genossenschaft (SWITZERLAND).




Transgourmet acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of GM Food.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


GM Food: distribution of daily food and near-food supplies for retailers such as supermarkets and for foodservice operators (restaurants, hotels and catering companies) in Spain mainly.










—


Transgourmet: procurement and wholesale supply of daily consumer goods in several EU and non-EU countries and, through the Bell Food Group, production of processed meat products, spices/condiments and a variety of convenience products.






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.10252 — Transgourmet Group/General Markets Food Iberica
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.
Case T-355/21: Action brought on 24 June 2021 — Polo Club Düsseldorf v EUIPO — Company Bridge and Life (POLO CLUB DÜSSELDORF EST. 1976)
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, education, footwear industry, personal effects, registered trade mark, sports equipment, sports facilities, tourism, trade-mark law








C_2021329EN.01003701.xml










16.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/37






Action brought on 24 June 2021 — Polo Club Düsseldorf v EUIPO — Company Bridge and Life (POLO CLUB DÜSSELDORF EST. 1976)
(Case T-355/21)
(2021/C 329/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Polo Club Düsseldorf GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: C. Weil, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Company Bridge and Life, SL (Elche, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark POLO CLUB DÜSSELDORF EST. 1976 — Application for registration No 17 984 671

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2021 in Case R 1667/2020-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


change the contested decision, and










—


reject the opposition.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-182/21: Order of the President of the Court of 24 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Nokia Technologies Oy v Daimler AG, in the presence of: Continental Automotive GmbH and Others
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competition, competition law, dominant position, patent law, patents licence








C_2021382EN.01002402.xml










20.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/24






Order of the President of the Court of 24 June 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Nokia Technologies Oy v Daimler AG, in the presence of: Continental Automotive GmbH and Others
(Case C-182/21) (1)

(2021/C 382/34)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 252, 28.6.2021.
Case C-389/21 P: Appeal brought on 24 June 2021 by the European Central Bank against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 14 April 2021 in Case T-504/19, Crédit Lyonnais v ECB
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU banking union, banking supervision, credit institution, financial supervision








C_2021320EN.01003202.xml










9.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/32






Appeal brought on 24 June 2021 by the European Central Bank against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 14 April 2021 in Case T-504/19, Crédit Lyonnais v ECB
(Case C-389/21 P)
(2021/C 320/34)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Central Bank (represented by: C. Zilioli, R. Ugena, M. Ioannidis and F. Bonnard, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Crédit Lyonnais

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court of Justice should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal;










—


order Crédit Lyonnais to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The European Central Bank (‘ECB’) submits that the judgment under appeal should be set aside, because the General Court:






—


exceeded the limits of judicial review by substituting its own assessment of complex economic factors for that of the ECB, in breach of the standard established by EU courts on the matter;










—


breached its duty to state reasons by not allowing the ECB to understand in what way its assessment of the dual guarantee by the State, issued in the context of the regulated savings, could be flawed;










—


distorted the evidence that had been submitted to it in the course of the proceedings by a manifestly incorrect reading, both of the decision contested at first instance (decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRCAG-39 of 3 May 2019), and of the methodology applied by the ECB and against which the request for exemption submitted by Crédit Lyonnais had been examined;










—


infringed Article 4(1)(94) of Regulation 575/2013 (1) by adding to the definition of the risk of excessive leverage the criteria that are not there, and Article 429(14) thereof, concerning the exemption of certain exposures from the calculation of the leverage ratio, thus depriving the ECB of the discretion granted to it by virtue of that article.






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1), as amended by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/62 of 10 October 2014 amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the leverage ratio (OJ 2015 L 11, p. 37).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10318 — Apollo Management/Verizon Media Group) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 245/18
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Internet, data processing, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, means of communication, merger control








C_2021245EN.01003301.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/33






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10318 — Apollo Management/Verizon Media Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 245/18)

1.   
On 15 June 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:






—


Investment funds managed by affiliates of Apollo Management, L.P. (‘Apollo Management’, USA),










—


Verizon Media Netherlands B.V., (the Netherlands) and Oath Inc. (USA) and certain subsidiaries (together, the ‘Verizon Media Group’)




Apollo acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the Verizon Media Group.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Apollo Management: portfolio investments,










—


for Verizon Media Group: media and technology activities.






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.10318 — Apollo Management/Verizon Media Group
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.
Case C-386/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons (Belgium) lodged on 24 June 2021 — Ryanair DAC v Happy Flights Srl, formerly Happy Flights Sprl
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, claim, consumer protection, contract, contract of carriage, contractual liability, damages, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction








C_2021382EN.01001402.xml










20.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 382/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons (Belgium) lodged on 24 June 2021 — Ryanair DAC v Happy Flights Srl, formerly Happy Flights Sprl
(Case C-386/21)
(2021/C 382/19)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ryanair DAC

Defendant: Happy Flights Srl, formerly Happy Flights Sprl

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’, within the meaning of that provision, covers an action for compensation brought on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, (2) by a collection agency, a third party to the contract of carriage by air, which relies on its status as assignee of the claim, even though that agency does not demonstrate that it is the successor to all the initial contracting party’s rights and obligations?










2.


If the first question is answered in the affirmative, must Article 7(1)(a) and 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 1215/2012 be interpreted as meaning that the place of performance of the obligation in question is the place of performance of the contract of carriage by air, that is to say the place of departure or place of arrival of the flight, or, if appropriate, another place?






(1)  OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.
Case C-167/20 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 24 June 2021 — WD v European Food Safety Authority (Appeal — Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Fixed-term contract — Decision not to reclassify — Lack of appraisal reports — Decision not to renew the contract)
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: reassignment, servant (EU), temporary employment, termination of employment, work contract








C_2021320EN.01000901.xml










9.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/9






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 24 June 2021 — WD v European Food Safety Authority
(Case C-167/20 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Decision not to reclassify - Lack of appraisal reports - Decision not to renew the contract)
(2021/C 320/09)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: WD (represented by: L. Levi, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Food Safety Authority (represented by: D. Detken and F. Volpi, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck, C. Dekemexhe and A. Duron, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders WD to bear her own costs relating to the appeal and pay those incurred by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).






(1)  OJ C 271, 17.8.2020.
State aid – Decision to raise no objections 2021/C 245/14
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, aid to undertakings, company in difficulties, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic








C_2021245EN.01001701.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/17






State aid – Decision to raise no objections
(2021/C 245/14)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:






Date of adoption of the decision


10 March 2021




Case No


86460




Decision No


016/21/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Region


Whole territory of Norway




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Amendments to the COVID-19 Grant scheme for undertakings suffering a substantial loss of turnover




Legal basis


Act on a temporary grant scheme for undertakings suffering a substantial loss of turnover after August 2020




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Compensate for damages to undertakings caused by the COVID-19 outbreak to secure employment and ensure a faster recovery of the economy after the crisis




Form of aid


Grants




Budget


Prior to the amendment, the estimated maximum budgetary implication of the period from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2021 was NOK 5 billion. This comes in addition to an estimated maximum budgetary implication of NOK 30 billion for the period from 1 March to 31 August 2020.
The Norwegian authorities estimate that the amendment of the adjustment factor applied for January and February 2021, will result in an increase of the estimated budgetary implication of NOK 125 million.




Intensity


100 %




Duration


The scheme, as previously prolonged, covers losses from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2021 included




Economic sectors


All sectors except for companies engaged in petroleum extraction and production, companies engaged in production, transmission, distribution and trade of electric power, financial institutions and companies whose main purpose is investment activities, and private kindergartens and airlines




Name and address of the granting authority







The Brønnøysund Register Centre




Brønnøysundregistrene




Postboks 900




N-8910 Brønnøysund




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/
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10263 — Ardian/Deli Home) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 245/20
Date: 2021-06-24
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: building industry, economic concentration, electronic commerce, improvement of housing, investment company, merger control, retail trade, supply, wood industry








C_2021245EN.01003601.xml










24.6.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/36






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10263 — Ardian/Deli Home)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 245/20)

1.   
On 16 June 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:






—


Ardian France SA (France) (‘Ardian’); and










—


Deli Home Holding B.V. (The Nerherlands) (‘Deli Home’).




Ardian acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, sole control of the whole of Deli Home.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Ardian: private equity asset management; and










—


for Deli Home: manufacturing and supply of timber-based home improvement products to retailers, builders’ merchants and online markets.






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.



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.10263 — Ardian/Deli Home
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’).