do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-52/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021 — Banco Santander SA v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Article 107(1) TFEU — Tax system — Corporate tax provisions allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in companies which are tax resident outside that Member State — Concept of ‘State aid’ — Condition relating to selectivity — Reference system — Derogation — Difference in treatment — Justification for the difference in treatment)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, State aid, amortisation, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, goodwill, nationality of legal persons, shareholding, tax relief








C_2021481EN.01000401.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/4






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021 — Banco Santander SA v European Commission
(Case C-52/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 107(1) TFEU - Tax system - Corporate tax provisions allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in companies which are tax resident outside that Member State - Concept of ‘State aid’ - Condition relating to selectivity - Reference system - Derogation - Difference in treatment - Justification for the difference in treatment)
(2021/C 481/05)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Banco Santander SA (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, abogados)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, B. Stromsky, C. Urraca Caviedes and P. Němečková, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Banco Santander SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.
Case C-338/20: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi — Poland) — Proceedings relating to the recognition and execution of a financial penalty imposed on D.P. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Mutual recognition — Financial penalties — Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA — Grounds for non-recognition and non-execution — Article 20(3) — Decision imposing a financial penalty — Observance of the rights of the defence — Notification of documents in a language not understood by the sentenced person — Translation of the essential elements of the decision)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, enforcement of ruling, fine, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, language, rights of the defence, translation








C_2021490EN.01001102.xml










6.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 490/11






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi — Poland) — Proceedings relating to the recognition and execution of a financial penalty imposed on D.P.
(Case C-338/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Mutual recognition - Financial penalties - Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA - Grounds for non-recognition and non-execution - Article 20(3) - Decision imposing a financial penalty - Observance of the rights of the defence - Notification of documents in a language not understood by the sentenced person - Translation of the essential elements of the decision)
(2021/C 490/10)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: D.P.

Defendant: Prokuratura Rejonowa Łódź-Bałuty

Operative part of the judgment

Article 20(3) of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as allowing the authority of the executing Member State to refuse to execute a decision, within the meaning of Article 1(a) of the framework decision, imposing a financial penalty for a road traffic offence, where that decision has been notified to the addressee thereof without a translation, into a language which he or she understands, of the elements of the decision which are essential in order to enable him or her to understand the charge against him or her and fully to exercise his or her rights of the defence, and without that addressee being afforded the opportunity to obtain such a translation on request.


(1)  OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Case T-635/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Dermavita Company v EUIPO — Allergan Holdings France (JUVÉDERM VYBRANCE) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark JUVÉDERM VYBRANCE — Late payment of the appeal fee — Inadmissibility of the appeal before the Board of Appeal — Article 101(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Article 106(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Restitutio in integrum)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, aesthetic surgery, medical device, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021481EN.01002701.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/27






Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Dermavita Company v EUIPO — Allergan Holdings France (JUVÉDERM VYBRANCE)
(Case T-635/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark JUVÉDERM VYBRANCE - Late payment of the appeal fee - Inadmissibility of the appeal before the Board of Appeal - Article 101(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 106(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Restitutio in integrum)
(2021/C 481/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Dermavita Company S.a.r.l. (Beirut, Lebanon) (represented by: D. Todorov, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Allergan Holdings France SAS (Courbevoie, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 August 2020 (Case R 1014/2020-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Dermavita Company and Allergan Holdings France.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Dermavita Company S.a.r.l. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 443, 21.12.2020.
Case T-238/19: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Wepa Hygieneprodukte and Others v Commission (State aid — Aid regime implemented by Germany for certain large electricity consumers — Exemption from network charges for the period 2012-2013 — Decision declaring the aid regime incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering the recovery of the aid granted — Action for annulment — Time limit for bringing an action — Admissibility — Concept of ‘aid’ — State resources — Selectivity)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, State aid, charges for use of infrastructure, control of State aid, electrical energy, electricity supply, energy consumption, energy supply, equal treatment, reimbursement of aid








C_2021471EN.01004201.xml










22.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/42






Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Wepa Hygieneprodukte and Others v Commission
(Case T-238/19) (1)

(State aid - Aid regime implemented by Germany for certain large electricity consumers - Exemption from network charges for the period 2012-2013 - Decision declaring the aid regime incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering the recovery of the aid granted - Action for annulment - Time limit for bringing an action - Admissibility - Concept of ‘aid’ - State resources - Selectivity)
(2021/C 471/58)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Wepa Hygieneprodukte GmbH (Arnsberg, Germany), Wepa Leuna GmbH (Leuna, Germany), Wepa Papierfabrik Sachsen GmbH (Arnsberg) (represented by: H. Janssen, A. Vallone and L. Kienzle, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicants: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: D. Klebs, J. Möller, R. Kanitz, S. Heimerl and S. Costanzo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2019/56 of 28 May 2018 on aid scheme SA.34045 (2013/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for baseload consumers under Paragraph 19 StromNEV (OJ 2019 L 14, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Wepa Hygieneprodukte GmbH, Wepa Leuna GmbH and Wepa Papierfabrik Sachsen GmbH to each bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Case C-598/19: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco — Spain) — Confederación Nacional de Centros Especiales de Empleo (Conacee) v Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Public procurement — Directive 2014/24/EU — Article 20 — Reserved contracts — National legislation reserving the right to participate in certain public procurement procedures to Social initiative special employment centres — Additional conditions not provided for by the directive — Principles of equal treatment and proportionality)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, integration of people with disabilities, principle of proportionality, public contract, public procurement, transparency in decision-making, worker with disabilities








C_2021481EN.01001201.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/12






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco — Spain) — Confederación Nacional de Centros Especiales de Empleo (Conacee) v Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa
(Case C-598/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public procurement - Directive 2014/24/EU - Article 20 - Reserved contracts - National legislation reserving the right to participate in certain public procurement procedures to Social initiative special employment centres - Additional conditions not provided for by the directive - Principles of equal treatment and proportionality)
(2021/C 481/16)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia del País Vasco

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Confederación Nacional de Centros Especiales de Empleo (Conacee)

Defendant: Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa

Operative part of the judgment

Article 20(1) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State from imposing additional criteria beyond those laid down by that provision, thereby excluding from reserved public procurement procedures certain economic operators which satisfy the criteria laid down in that provision, provided that that Member State complies with the principles of equal treatment and proportionality.


(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.
Case C-54/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021 — Axa Mediterranean Holding SA v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Article 107(1) TFEU — Tax system — Corporate tax provisions allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in companies which are tax resident outside that Member State — Concept of ‘State aid’ — Condition relating to selectivity — Reference system — Derogation — Difference in treatment — Justification for the difference in treatment)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, State aid, amortisation, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, goodwill, nationality of legal persons, shareholding, tax relief








C_2021481EN.01000502.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/5






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021 — Axa Mediterranean Holding SA v European Commission
(Case C-54/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 107(1) TFEU - Tax system - Corporate tax provisions allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in companies which are tax resident outside that Member State - Concept of ‘State aid’ - Condition relating to selectivity - Reference system - Derogation - Difference in treatment - Justification for the difference in treatment)
(2021/C 481/07)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Axa Mediterranean Holding SA (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, abogados)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, B. Stromsky, C. Urraca Caviedes and P. Němečková, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Axa Mediterranean Holding SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.
Case T-505/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Guo v EUIPO — Sand Cph (sandriver) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark sandriver — Earlier EU word mark SAND — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wool








C_2021481EN.01002602.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/26






Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Guo v EUIPO — Sand Cph (sandriver)
(Case T-505/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark sandriver - Earlier EU word mark SAND - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2021/C 481/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Xiuling Guo (Shanghai, China) (represented by: L. Le Stanc, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Mrozowski, A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Sand Cph A/S (Copenhagen, Denmark)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2020 (Case R 2019/2019-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Sand Cph and Ms Guo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ms Xiuling Guo to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.
Joined Cases C-53/19 P and C-65/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021 — Banco Santander SA, Santusa Holding SL (C-53/19 P), Kingdom of Spain (C-65/19 P) v European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland (Appeal — State aid — Article 107(1) TFEU — Tax system — Corporate tax provisions allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in companies which are tax resident outside that Member State — Concept of ‘State aid’ — Condition relating to selectivity — Reference system — Derogation — Difference in treatment — Justification for the difference in treatment)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, State aid, amortisation, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, goodwill, nationality of legal persons, shareholding, tax relief








C_2021481EN.01000501.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/5






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021 — Banco Santander SA, Santusa Holding SL (C-53/19 P), Kingdom of Spain (C-65/19 P) v European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland
(Joined Cases C-53/19 P and C-65/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 107(1) TFEU - Tax system - Corporate tax provisions allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in companies which are tax resident outside that Member State - Concept of ‘State aid’ - Condition relating to selectivity - Reference system - Derogation - Difference in treatment - Justification for the difference in treatment)
(2021/C 481/06)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellants: Banco Santander SA, Santusa Holding SL (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, abogados) (C-53/19 P), Kingdom of Spain (represented: initially by A. Rubio González and A. Sampol Pucurull, and subsequently by S. Centeno Huerta and S. Jiménez García, Agents) (C-65/19 P)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, B. Stromsky, C. Urraca Caviedes and P. Němečková, Agents), Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller and R. Kanitz, Agents), Ireland

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeals;










2.


Orders Banco Santander SA, Santusa Holding SL and the Kingdom of Spain to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.
Case T-43/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — AV and AW v Parliament (Civil service — Officials — Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary measure — Downgrading — Rights of the defence — Principle of good administration — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: assistant, demotion, disciplinary proceedings, rights of the defence








C_2021490EN.01003402.xml










6.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 490/34






Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — AV and AW v Parliament
(Case T-43/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary measure - Downgrading - Rights of the defence - Principle of good administration - Manifest error of assessment)
(2021/C 490/37)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: AV and AW (represented by: L. Levi, S. Rodrigues and J. Martins, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Scafarto and I. Lázaro Betancor, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the Parliament’s decisions of 21 June 2019 imposing on one of the applicants a disciplinary penalty of downgrading by four grades, from AST 6 to AST 2, and, on the other applicant, a disciplinary penalty of downgrading by two grades, from AST 8 to AST 6, and, in so far as necessary, of the Parliament’s decisions of 28 November 2019 rejecting the applicants’ complaints of 17 July 2019 against the decisions of 21 June 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders AV and AW to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
Case T-342/20: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Indo European Foods v EUIPO — Chakari (Abresham Super Basmati Selaa Grade One World’s Best Rice) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Abresham Super Basmati Selaa Grade One World’s Best Rice — Earlier non-registered word mark BASMATI — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and Euratom — Transition period — Interest in bringing proceedings — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Rules governing common law actions for passing off — Likelihood of misrepresentation — Likelihood of dilution of the reputation of the earlier mark)
Date: 2021-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, rice, trade-mark law








C_2021481EN.01002301.xml










29.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 481/23






Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Indo European Foods v EUIPO — Chakari (Abresham Super Basmati Selaa Grade One World’s Best Rice)
(Case T-342/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Abresham Super Basmati Selaa Grade One World’s Best Rice - Earlier non-registered word mark BASMATI - Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and Euratom - Transition period - Interest in bringing proceedings - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Rules governing common law actions for passing off - Likelihood of misrepresentation - Likelihood of dilution of the reputation of the earlier mark)
(2021/C 481/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Indo European Foods Ltd (Harrow, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister, and N. Welch, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Hamid Ahmad Chakari (Vienna, Austria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2020 (Case R 1079/2019 4), relating to opposition proceedings between Indo European Foods and Mr Chakari.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 April 2020 (Case R 1079/2019-4);










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Indo European Foods Ltd for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.






(1)  OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.