do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-100/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — XY v Hauptzollamt B (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Taxation of energy products and electricity — Directive 2003/96/EC — Article 17(1)(a) — Tax reductions on the consumption of energy products and electricity in favour of energy-intensive businesses — Optional reduction — Arrangements governing the repayment of tax levied in breach of provisions of national law adopted on the basis of a power granted to the Member States in that directive — Payment of interest — Principle of equal treatment)
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electrical energy, environmental tax, equal treatment, interest, national implementing measure, national law, tax exemption, tax law








C_2021462EN.01001802.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/18






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — XY v Hauptzollamt B
(Case C-100/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Taxation of energy products and electricity - Directive 2003/96/EC - Article 17(1)(a) - Tax reductions on the consumption of energy products and electricity in favour of energy-intensive businesses - Optional reduction - Arrangements governing the repayment of tax levied in breach of provisions of national law adopted on the basis of a power granted to the Member States in that directive - Payment of interest - Principle of equal treatment)
(2021/C 462/17)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: XY

Respondent: Hauptzollamt B

Operative part of the judgment

EU law must be interpreted as requiring that, in the event of refund of the amount of electricity tax wrongly levied on account of the incorrect application of a national provision adopted on the basis of a power granted to the Member States by Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, interest be paid on that amount.


(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Case C-422/20: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Köln — Germany) — RK v CR (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Succession — Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 — Article 6(a) — Declining of jurisdiction — Article 7(a) — Jurisdiction — Examination by the court second seised — Article 22 — Choice of law applicable — Article 39 — Mutual recognition — Article 83(4) — Transitional provisions)
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: conflict of jurisdiction, inheritance, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, law of succession, private international law








C_2021471EN.01001002.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/10






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Köln — Germany) — RK v CR
(Case C-422/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Succession - Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 - Article 6(a) - Declining of jurisdiction - Article 7(a) - Jurisdiction - Examination by the court second seised - Article 22 - Choice of law applicable - Article 39 - Mutual recognition - Article 83(4) - Transitional provisions)
(2021/C 471/13)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings


Defendant and appellant: RK

Applicant and respondent: CR

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 7(a) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 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 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order for there to have been a declining of jurisdiction, within the meaning of Article 6(a) of that regulation, in favour of the courts of the Member State whose law was chosen by the deceased, it is not necessary for the court previously seised to have expressly declined jurisdiction, but that intention must be unequivocally apparent from the decision that it delivered in that regard.










2.


Article 6(a), Article 7(a) and Article 39 of Regulation No 650/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that the court of the Member State seised following a declining of jurisdiction is not competent to examine whether the conditions set out in those provisions were satisfied in order for the court previously seised to decline jurisdiction.










3.


Article 6(a) and Article 7(a) of Regulation No 650/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that the rules of jurisdiction set out in those provisions also apply in the event that, in his or her will, drawn up before 17 August 2015, the deceased had not chosen the law applicable to the succession, and that the designation of that law can be inferred from Article 83(4) of that regulation alone.






(1)  OJ C 443, 21.12.2020.
Case T-585/21: Action brought on 9 September 2021 — Zásilkovna v Commission
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Czechia, State aid, control of State aid, postal service, reimbursement of aid, services of general interest, universal service








C_2021481EN.01003101.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/31






Action brought on 9 September 2021 — Zásilkovna v Commission
(Case T-585/21)
(2021/C 481/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Zásilkovna s. r. o (Praha, Czech Republic) (represented by: R. Kubáč, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Commission’s decision in case SA.55208 (2020/C) — Czech Post USO compensation for the period 2018-2022, in the form of a letter dated (i) 9 July 2021 and (ii) 31 August 2021, partially dismissing the complaint of the applicant of 8 November 2019 as regards the cross-subsidisation by Česká pošta s.p. of its commercial activities;










—


order the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicant.





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 that the Commission made a manifest error in concluding that Czech Post’s cross-subsidisation does not constitute State aid under Article 107(1) TFEU.






—


In particular, it is argued that Czech Post’s cross-subsidisation constitutes a stand-alone incompatible State aid under Article 107(1) TFEU, taking place already at least in the 2013–2017 period (but very likely even before), which the Commission should thus have thoroughly assessed in separate administrative proceedings, and not as an ancillary issue within the proceedings in case SA.55208 (2020/C), limited to the 2018–2022 period. This is supported by the Commission’s previous case law. However, the Commission wrongly concluded that this cross-subsidisation does not constitute State aid at all.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed an essential procedural requirement, as its decision not to consider Czech Post’s cross-subsidisation as a stand-alone State aid is not duly reasoned.






—


In particular, the Commission failed adequately to state the reasons in the contested decision. Therefore, the Commission infringed the applicant’s essential procedural right, since all EU institutions are obliged to state the reasons for the measure in question to ensure its reviewability before the courts.
Case T-562/21: Action brought on 9 September 2021 — Worldwide Brands v EUIPO — Guangdong Camel Apparel (CAMEL CROWN)
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic game, footwear industry, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile product, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2021462EN.01004801.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/48






Action brought on 9 September 2021 — Worldwide Brands v EUIPO — Guangdong Camel Apparel (CAMEL CROWN)
(Case T-562/21)
(2021/C 462/57)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Worldwide Brands, Inc. Zweigniederlassung Deutschland (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: J. Gracia Albero and R. Ahijón Lana, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Guangdong Camel Apparel Co. Ltd (Foshan City, China)

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 word mark CAMEL CROWN — Application for registration No 17 882 201

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 June 2021 in Joined Cases R 159/2020-5 and R 184/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


partially annul the contested decision to the extent that it partially upheld the appeal filed by the intervener and partially rejected the appeal filed by this party, allowing the registration of the contested trademark for the indicated goods in classes 24 and 28;










—


order the defendant to bear the costs of the present proceedings, including the costs deriving from the proceedings before the Opposition Division and the Fifth Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-855/19: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — G. Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 69 — Chargeability of VAT — Intra-Community acquisition of motor fuels — Obligation to make early payment of VAT — Article 206 — Concept of ‘interim payments’ — Article 273 — Correct collection of VAT and prevention of evasion — Discretion of the Member States)
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, acquisition of property, basis of tax assessment, customs document, excise duty, intra-EU trade, motor fuel, tax exemption








C_2021462EN.01001001.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/10






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — G. Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy
(Case C-855/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 69 - Chargeability of VAT - Intra-Community acquisition of motor fuels - Obligation to make early payment of VAT - Article 206 - Concept of ‘interim payments’ - Article 273 - Correct collection of VAT and prevention of evasion - Discretion of the Member States)
(2021/C 462/08)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: G. Sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 69, 206 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, must be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law which imposes an obligation to pay value added tax (VAT) on the intra-Community acquisition of motor fuels before that VAT becomes chargeable, within the meaning of Article 69 of Directive 2006/112.


(1)  OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.
Corrigendum to EFTA Surveillance Authority Delegated Decision No 33/21/COL of 22 April 2021 approving the disease-free status of rabies virus (RABV) of Norway and amending Decision No 032/21/COL [2021/1333] (Official Journal of the European Union L 290 of 12 August 2021)
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, health risk, rabies, veterinary inspection, zoonosis








L_2021318EN.01000401.xml










9.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 318/4







Corrigendum to EFTA Surveillance Authority Delegated Decision of 22 April 2021 approving the disease-free status of rabies virus (RABV) of Norway and amending Decision No 032/21/COL [2021/1333]

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 290 of 12 August 2021
)


On the cover page, and on page 11, in the title:
for:


                  ‘EFTA Surveillance Authority Delegated Decision of 22 April 2021 approving the disease-free status of rabies virus (RABV) of Norway and amending Decision No 032/21/COL [2021/1333]’,

read:


                  ‘EFTA Surveillance Authority Delegated Decision No 33/21/COL of 22 April 2021 approving the disease-free status of rabies virus (RABV) of Norway and amending Decision No 32/21/COL [2021/1333]’.
Corrigendum to EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 32/21/COL of 21 April 2021 regarding approval of disease-free and non-vaccination statuses and eradication programmes of Norway and Iceland or certain zones or compartments thereof as regards certain listed diseases in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 [2021/1332] (Official Journal of the European Union L 290 of 12 August 2021)
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Iceland, Norway, animal disease, health risk, infectious disease, vaccination, veterinary inspection, zoonosis








L_2021318EN.01000301.xml










9.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 318/3







Corrigendum to EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision of 21 April 2021 regarding approval of disease-free and non-vaccination statuses and eradication programmes of Norway and Iceland or certain zones or compartments thereof as regards certain listed diseases in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 [2021/1332]

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 290 of 12 August 2021
)


On the cover page, and on page 5, in the title:
for:


                  ‘EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision of 21 April 2021 regarding approval of disease-free and non-vaccination statuses and eradication programmes of Norway and Iceland or certain zones or compartments thereof as regards certain listed diseases in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 [2021/1332]’,

read:


                  ‘EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 32/21/COL of 21 April 2021 regarding approval of disease-free and non-vaccination statuses and eradication programmes of Norway and Iceland or certain zones or compartments thereof as regards certain listed diseases in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689 [2021/1332]’.
Case C-705/19: Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Axpo Trading Ag v Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE, intervener: Fallimento Esperia SpA
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Switzerland, abolition of customs duties, control of State aid, discrimination on the basis of nationality, electrical energy, import tax, intra-EU trade, national law, quantitative restriction, renewable energy








C_2021481EN.01002101.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/21






Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Axpo Trading Ag v Gestore dei Servizi Energetici SpA — GSE, intervener: Fallimento Esperia SpA
(Case C-705/19) (1)

(2021/C 481/29)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10363 — NPM Capital/Infinitas) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 363/03
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: bookshop, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, publishing, teaching materials








C_2021363EN.01000301.xml










9.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/3






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10363 — NPM Capital/Infinitas)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 363/03)

1.   
On 31 August 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:






—


NPM Capital N.V. (‘NPM Capital’, the Netherlands), and










—


Infinitas Learning Holding B.V. (‘Infinitas’, the Netherlands).




NPM Capital acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Infinitas.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for NPM Capital: investing in portfolio companies active in a variety of sectors, including automotive, food, healthcare and industrial services; and










—


for Infinitas: sale of educational solutions and materials that provide content in line with the mandatory school curriculum (primary, secondary, vocational, and higher education) or accreditation (professional/ healthcare). The buyers are (schools and teachers of) institutions that are accredited to meet standards of educational quality. Infinitas is active in the Netherlands (with its brand ‘Noordhoff’), Belgium (with its brand ‘Plantyn’) and Sweden (with its brand ‘Liber’).






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.10363 — NPM Capital/Infinitas
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-419/19: Order of the President of the Court of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Irideos SpA v Poste Italiane SpA, interveners: Fastweb SpA, Tim SpA
Date: 2021-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, postal service, public institution, public procurement, services of general interest, tendering, universal service








C_2021481EN.01002001.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/20






Order of the President of the Court of 9 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Irideos SpA v Poste Italiane SpA, interveners: Fastweb SpA, Tim SpA
(Case C-419/19) (1)

(2021/C 481/27)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.