do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-706/20: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 3 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Amoena Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Headings 6212 and 9021 — Mastectomy bras — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1167 — Notion of ‘accessories’ — Interpretation of the judgment of 19 December 2019, Amoena (C 677/18, EU:C:2019:1142))
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, clothing, common customs tariff, medical device, specification of tariff heading








C_2021471EN.01001301.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/13






Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 3 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — Amoena Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
(Case C-706/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Headings 6212 and 9021 - Mastectomy bras - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1167 - Notion of ‘accessories’ - Interpretation of the judgment of 19 December 2019, Amoena (C 677/18, EU:C:2019:1142))
(2021/C 471/17)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Amoena Ltd

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Operative part of the order







1.


Paragraph 53 of the judgment of 19 December 2019, Amoena (C-677/18, EU:C:2019:1142), in the English-language version, must be interpreted as meaning that:






—


in the first sentence of that paragraph, the terms ‘them’ and ‘their’ refer to the breast forms and the term ‘they’ refers to the mastectomy bras;










—


in the second sentence of that paragraph, the term ‘their’ and the first two occurrences of the term ‘they’ refer to the mastectomy bras, whereas the last occurrence of the term ‘they’ refers to the breast forms.














2.


In the second sentence of paragraph 53 of the judgment of 19 December 2019, Amoena (C-677/18, EU:C:2019:1142), the Court, in order to determine whether the mastectomy bras may be regarded as breast form ‘accessories’ for the purposes of Chapter 90 of the Combined Nomenclature, set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1821 of 6 October 2016 merely applied the test defined in paragraph 51 of that judgment, according to which interchangeable parts or devices which enable a machine to perform a particular service relative to its main function must be classified as ‘accessories’ for the purposes of that chapter.






(1)  OJ C 110, 29.3.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10393 – BROOKFIELD / MODULAIRE) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 472/04
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: building, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, property market, provision of services








C_2021472EN.01000401.xml










23.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 472/4






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10393 – BROOKFIELD / MODULAIRE)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 472/04)
On 3 September 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 policy’ 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 32021M10393. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-173/19 P: Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 3 September 2021 — Scandlines Danmark ApS, Scandlines Deutschland GmbH v European Commission, Kingdom of Denmark (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Action for annulment — State aid — Public financing of the Fehmarn Belt fixed rail-road link — Individual aid — Act not open to challenge — Purely confirmatory measure — Preparatory measure)
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Baltic Sea, Denmark, EU financing, State aid, control of State aid, project of common interest, public financing, rail transport, road transport, tunnel








C_2021471EN.01001201.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/12






Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 3 September 2021 — Scandlines Danmark ApS, Scandlines Deutschland GmbH v European Commission, Kingdom of Denmark
(Case C-173/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Action for annulment - State aid - Public financing of the Fehmarn Belt fixed rail-road link - Individual aid - Act not open to challenge - Purely confirmatory measure - Preparatory measure)
(2021/C 471/15)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Scandlines Danmark ApS, Scandlines Deutschland GmbH (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, advokat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: S. Noë, V. Bottka and L. Armati, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: J. Nymann-Lindegren, acting as Agent, and by R. Holdgaard, advokat)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed as being manifestly unfounded.










2.


Scandlines Danmark ApS and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH shall pay, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the European Commission.










3.


The Kingdom of Denmark shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 148, 29.4.2019.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 2 September 2021 2021/C 354/01
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021354EN.01000101.xml










3.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

2 September 2021
(2021/C 354/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1846 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,31 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4360 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85915 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1939 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0848 




ISK


Iceland króna


150,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,2938 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,382 




HUF


Hungarian forint


347,85 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5069 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9393 




TRY


Turkish lira


9,7942 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6038 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4944 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2075 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6702 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5921 




KRW


South Korean won


1 372,66 




ZAR


South African rand


16,9882 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6503 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5010 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 874,01 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9256 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,039 




RUB


Russian rouble


86,2301 




THB


Thai baht


38,446 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,1429 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,6529 




INR


Indian rupee


86,5205 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-549/21: Action brought on 3 September 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, anti-pollution device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wastewater, water treatment








C_2021422EN.01003701.xml










18.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/37






Action brought on 3 September 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)
(Case T-549/21)
(2021/C 422/48)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Rochem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rochem Marine Srl (Genoa, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark ROCHEM — International registration designating the European Union No 1 151 485

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 June 2021 in Case R 1547/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


stay the proceeding until a final judgement has been taken in the proceeding before the Court of Milan against the Italian trade mark 933481 ROCHEM MARINE (fig.);










—


In the alternative, annul the contested decision, ordering that the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO renders a new decision, refusing the declaration of invalidation filed against the international registration No 1 151 485 ROCHEM (fig.) against the classes 11 and 40;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, should the latter appear before the Court, to bear their own costs and the fees and costs of the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 18 and 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-670/20: Order of the General Court of 3 September 2021 — SMCK Hair Care Products v EUIPO — Carolina Herrera (COOL GIRL)
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, cosmetic product, hairdressing and beauty care, household electrical appliance, pharmaceutical product, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021431EN.01005602.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/56






Order of the General Court of 3 September 2021 — SMCK Hair Care Products v EUIPO — Carolina Herrera (COOL GIRL)
(Case T-670/20) (1)

(2021/C 431/67)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Case T-548/21: Action brought on 3 September 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, anti-pollution device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wastewater, water treatment








C_2021422EN.01003601.xml










18.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/36






Action brought on 3 September 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)
(Case T-548/21)
(2021/C 422/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Rochem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rochem Marine Srl (Genoa, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark ROCHEM — International registration designating the European Union No 1 151 545

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 June 2021 in Case R 1546/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


stay the proceeding until a final judgement has been taken in the proceeding before the court of Milan against the Italian trade mark 933481 ROCHEM MARINE (fig.);










—


in the alternative, annul the contested decision, ordering that the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO renders a new decision, refusing the declaration of invalidation filed against the international registration No 1 151 545 ROCHEM (word) against the classes 11 and 40;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, should the latter appear before the Court, to bear their own costs and the fees and costs of the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 18 and 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures 2021/C 354/02
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, tungsten








C_2021354EN.01000201.xml










3.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/2






Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures
(2021/C 354/02)

1.   

As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.


2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.
3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.








4.


This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.









Product


Country(ies) of origin or exportation


Measures


Reference


Date of expiry (3)





Tungsten carbide, fused tungsten carbide and tungsten carbide simply mixed with metallic powder


The People’s Republic of China


Anti-dumping duty


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/942 of 1 June 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of tungsten carbide, fused tungsten carbide and tungsten carbide simply mixed with metallic powder originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council
(OJ L 142, 2.6.2017, p. 53)


3.6.2022










(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10336 — PORR/Doka/JV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 360/02
Date: 2021-09-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: building industry, civil engineering, economic concentration, joint venture, logistics, merger control, provision of services, road building








C_2021360EN.01000201.xml










8.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 360/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10336 — PORR/Doka/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 360/02)
On 3 September 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 German language 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 32021M10336. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.