do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-581/21 P: Appeal brought on 21 September 2021 by Ryanair DAC, Laudamotion GmbH against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 12 July 2021 in Case T-866/19, Ryanair and Laudamotion v Commission
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Flevoland, Netherlands, North Holland, air traffic, air traffic control, airport, transport regulations








C_2021462EN.01003101.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/31






Appeal brought on 21 September 2021 by Ryanair DAC, Laudamotion GmbH against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 12 July 2021 in Case T-866/19, Ryanair and Laudamotion v Commission
(Case C-581/21 P)
(2021/C 462/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Ryanair DAC, Laudamotion GmbH (represented by: E. Vahida, avocat, S. Rating, abogado, and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:






—


set aside the order under appeal;










—


refer the case back to the General Court for reconsideration;










—


reserve the costs of the proceedings at first instance and on appeal.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellants advance two grounds of appeal.
The General Court infringed EU law and distorted the facts (1) in considering that the priority of the Slot Regulation (1) is relevant to determining whether the Traffic Distribution Rules (2) entail implementing measures, and (2) by disregarding the normal course of events in determining the artificial nature of a request by the appellants for an implementing measure from the slot coordinator.
In addition, the appellants submit that the General Court has failed to state reasons to support its findings in the order under appeal.


(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports (OJ 1993 L 14, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1585 of 24 September 2019 on the establishment of traffic distribution rules pursuant to Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council for the airports Amsterdam Schiphol and Amsterdam Lelystad (notified under document C(2019) 6816) (OJ 2019 L 246, p. 24).
Case C-599/21 P: Appeal brought on 21 September 2021 by AM.VI. Srl, Quinam Limited, the successor in law to Fashioneast Sàrl against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 14 July 2021 in Case T-297/20, Fashioneast and AM.VI. v EUIPO — Moschillo (RICH JOHN RICHMOND)
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, clothing, cosmetic product, fancy leather goods and glove-making industry, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, optical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022095EN.01000602.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/6






Appeal brought on 21 September 2021 by AM.VI. Srl, Quinam Limited, the successor in law to Fashioneast Sàrl against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 14 July 2021 in Case T-297/20, Fashioneast and AM.VI. v EUIPO — Moschillo (RICH JOHN RICHMOND)
(Case C-599/21 P)
(2022/C 95/09)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: AM.VI. Srl, Quinam Limited, the successor in law to Fashioneast Sàrl (represented by: A. Camusso, M. Baghetti, avvocati, A. Boros, ügyvéd)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 17 January 2022, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that AM. VI. and Quinam Limited shall bear their own costs
Council Decision of 21 September 2021 adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 4 of the European Union for the financial year 2021 2021/C 384 I/01
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU expenditure, European Commission, amending budget, budgetary resources, draft budget (EU), financial year, general budget (EU), own resources, regional policy




CI2021384EN.01000101.xml










22.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 384/1






COUNCIL DECISION
of 21 September 2021
adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 4 of the European Union for the financial year 2021
(2021/C 384 I/01)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314 thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (1), and in particular Article 44 thereof,
Whereas:






—


the Union’s budget for the financial year 2021 was definitively adopted on 18 December 2020 (2);










—


on 2 July 2021, the Commission submitted a proposal containing draft amending budget No 4 to the general budget for the financial year 2021;




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article
The Council’s position on draft amending budget No 4 of the European Union for the financial year 2021 was adopted on 21 September 2021.
The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council’s website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/


Done at Brussels, 21 September 2021.


For the Council


The President

G. DOVŽAN




(1)  OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 93, 17.3.2021, p. 1.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/1693 of 21 September 2021 amending Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 in support of countering illicit proliferation and trafficking of small arms, light weapons (SALW) and ammunition and their impact in Latin America and the Caribbean in the framework of the EU Strategy against Illicit Firearms, Small Arms & Light Weapons and their Ammunition ‘Securing Arms, Protecting Citizens’
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Caribbean Islands, EU strategy, Latin America, arms control, arms trade, fight against crime, firearms and munitions, illicit trade, non-proliferation of arms, small arms




L_2021334EN.01001201.xml










22.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 334/12








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2021/1693
of 21 September 2021
         
amending Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 in support of countering illicit proliferation and trafficking of small arms, light weapons (SALW) and ammunition and their impact in Latin America and the Caribbean in the framework of the EU Strategy against Illicit Firearms, Small Arms & Light Weapons and their Ammunition ‘Securing Arms, Protecting Citizens’
         


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty of the European Union, and in particular Articles 28(1) and 31(1) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 17 December 2018, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 (1).












(2)


Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 provides for a 36-month implementation period for the activities referred to in Article 1 of that Decision from the date of the conclusion of the financing agreement referred to in Article 3(3) of that Decision.












(3)


The Organization of American States (OAS) requested an extension of the implementation period of Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 by 5 months, until 31 May 2022, to take into account the delay in the implementation of project activities under Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.












(4)


The continuation of the activities referred to in Article 1 of Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 until 31 May 2022 can be performed without any consequences as regards financial resources.












(5)


Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 5, paragraph 2 of Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 is replaced by the following:


‘2.   This Decision shall expire on 31 May 2022.’.




Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 21 September 2021.


For the Council


The President

G. DOVŽAN
            





(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/2010 of 17 December 2018 in support of countering illicit proliferation and trafficking of small arms, light weapons (SALW) and ammunition and their impact in Latin America and the Caribbean in the framework of the EU Strategy against Illicit Firearms, Small Arms & Light Weapons and their Ammunition ‘Securing Arms, Protecting Citizens’ (OJ L 322, 18.12.2018, p. 27).
Case T-690/19: Order of the General Court of 21 September 2021 — Daily Mail and General Trust plc and Others v Commission
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, United Kingdom, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, group of companies, reimbursement of aid, right of establishment, tax exemption








C_2021462EN.01005903.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/59






Order of the General Court of 21 September 2021 — Daily Mail and General Trust plc and Others v Commission
(Case T-690/19) (1)

(2021/C 462/74)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 20 September 2021 2021/C 383/05
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021383EN.01000501.xml










21.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/5






Euro exchange rates (1)

20 September 2021
(2021/C 383/05)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1711 




JPY


Japanese yen


128,18 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4359 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85705 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2173 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0883 




ISK


Iceland króna


152,00 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,2430 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,432 




HUF


Hungarian forint


353,97 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5997 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9493 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,1512 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6201 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5056 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1188 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6694 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5839 




KRW


South Korean won


1 393,32 




ZAR


South African rand


17,3301 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,5726 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5055 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 742,86 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9098 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,845 




RUB


Russian rouble


86,0700 




THB


Thai baht


39,062 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2495 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,6419 




INR


Indian rupee


86,2720 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10417 — D’Ieteren/Wehold/TVH Parts) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 390/01
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: distributor, economic concentration, general mechanical engineering, holding company, merger control, micro-computer, motor car, provision of services, real property, subsidiary, vehicle parts








C_2021390EN.01000101.xml










27.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10417 — D’Ieteren/Wehold/TVH Parts)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 390/01)
On 21 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 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 32021M10417. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-30/21: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Lennestadt — Germany) — Nemzeti Útdíjfizetési Szolgáltató Zrt. v NW (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Article 1(1) — Substantive scope — Concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ — Proceedings seeking to recover a charge relating to the use of a toll road)
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil proceedings, claim, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, judicial proceedings, jurisdiction, road transport tariff, toll








C_2021513EN.01001501.xml










20.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 513/15






Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Lennestadt — Germany) — Nemzeti Útdíjfizetési Szolgáltató Zrt. v NW
(Case C-30/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 1(1) - Substantive scope - Concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ - Proceedings seeking to recover a charge relating to the use of a toll road)
(2021/C 513/22)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Lennestadt

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Nemzeti Útdíjfizetési Szolgáltató Zrt.

Defendant: NW

Operative part of the order

Article 1(1) 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 must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’, within the meaning of that provision, covers an action to recover, through legal proceedings, a charge relating to the use of a toll road, brought by a company authorised in accordance with the law, which classifies the relationship arising from that usage as being governed by private law.


(1)  OJ C 148, 26.4.2021.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10427 — KKR/Telefonica/Infraco) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 383/07
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: capital market, economic concentration, insurance, investment company, merger control, telecommunications, wholesale trade








C_2021383EN.01000901.xml










21.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/9






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10427 — KKR/Telefonica/Infraco)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 383/07)

1.   
On 13 September 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:






—


KKR & Co. Inc. (USA, ‘KKR’),










—


Telefónica, S.A. (Spain, ‘Telefónica’),










—


InfraCo (Colombia), a company not yet incorporated which will operate Telefónica Colombia’s fibre network in Colombia.




KKR and Telefónica acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of InfraCo.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for KKR: global investment firm offering alternative asset management and capital markets and insurance solutions,










—


for Telefónica: global telecommunications company operating fixed and mobile communication networks, offering mobile, landline, internet and television services under a number of brands,










—


for InfraCo: operation and deployment of the fibre network infrastructure for the provision of wholesale telecommunication services in Colombia.






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.10427 — KKR/Telefónica/Infraco
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-689/20: Order of the President of the Court of 21 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad — Bulgaria) — ‘Banka DSK’ EAD v RP
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, interest, restriction on competition, unfair terms of contract








C_2021513EN.01002502.xml










20.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 513/25






Order of the President of the Court of 21 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad — Bulgaria) — ‘Banka DSK’ EAD v RP
(Case C-689/20) (1)

(2021/C 513/36)
Language of the case: Bulgarian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.
Case T-604/21: Action brought on 21 September 2021 — WP and Others v Commission
Date: 2021-09-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, equal treatment, transfer of pension rights








C_2021452EN.01004602.xml










8.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/46






Action brought on 21 September 2021 — WP and Others v Commission
(Case T-604/21)
(2021/C 452/59)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: WP, WQ, WR (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the PMO.4 of 16 November 2020 rejecting the application lodged on 14 September 2020 in the name of the deceased to seek recovery of his national pension rights that were transferred to the EU pension scheme, together with any interest accrued on those rights for all those years, until repaid in full;










—


annul, in so far as necessary, the express decision of 15 June 2021 rejecting the complaint of 15 February 2021 lodged in the name of the deceased, whose continuation by the estate was notified on 25 May 2021;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant was unjustly enriched.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment in that the application of the principle of unjust enrichment as affirmed by the case-law differs from the implementation of that principle by other institutions in otherwise identical situations.