do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10486 – CDPQ / CENTERBRIDGE / MEDICAL SOLUTIONS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 447/01
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, employment service, health care profession, investment company, merger control








C_2021447EN.01000101.xml










4.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 447/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10486 – CDPQ / CENTERBRIDGE / MEDICAL SOLUTIONS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 447/01)
On 18 October 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 32021M10486. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-714/19: Order of the General Court of 18 October 2021 — Smiths Group and Siti 1 v Commission
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, United Kingdom, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, foreign enterprise, group of companies, tax avoidance, tax exemption, tax law








C_2021502EN.01004201.xml










13.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 502/42






Order of the General Court of 18 October 2021 — Smiths Group and Siti 1 v Commission
(Case T-714/19) (1)

(2021/C 502/63)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.
Case T-677/21: Action brought on 18 October 2021 — TL v Commission
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, indemnification, promotion, right to justice, staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2021502EN.01004001.xml










13.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 502/40






Action brought on 18 October 2021 — TL v Commission
(Case T-677/21)
(2021/C 502/60)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: TL (represented by: L. Levi and N. Flandin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the applicant’s career development report (‘CDR’) for 2019;










—


subsidiarily, annul the CDR in so far it contains contested comments;










—


together with, and in so far as necessary, annul the defendant’s decision of 8 July 2021 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant against the CDR;










—


order the compensation of the non-material damage suffered by the applicant; and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that since no objectives have been fixed for 2019, the defendant could not conduct a proper and fair appraisal of the applicant’s performance in 2019. It is alleged that this lack of objectives has resulted in manifest errors of appreciation, in a breach of the duty of care and of the principle of good administration.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant breached Article 43 of the Staff Regulations and violated its Guidance for Reporting Officers. It is also alleged that the defendant committed manifest errors of assessment and misused its powers. The applicant also alleges that the defendant breached its duty of care and its duty of good administration.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant breached Article 292(2) TFUE in conjunction with Article 25(2) of Staff Regulations and Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Case C-637/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 18 October 2021 — K.R.; Other party: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, EU national, free movement of persons, freedom of movement, residence permit








C_2022024EN.01001901.xml










17.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 18 October 2021 — K.R.; Other party: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
(Case C-637/21)
(2022/C 24/25)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: K.R.

Other party to the proceedings: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 16(4) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC be interpreted as meaning that any presence in the host Member State, however brief, of an EU citizen with a right of permanent residence, is sufficient to interrupt a period of absence exceeding two consecutive years?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the negative, what factors should be taken into account in determining whether a presence in the host Member State by such an EU citizen interrupts a period of absence from the host Member State exceeding two consecutive years? In that regard, is it relevant whether the EU citizen concerned relocated the centre of her interests to another Member State?






(1)  OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77.
Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1657, and in Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1890, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1655 2021/C 421/02
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Cyprus, EU restrictive measure, Mediterranean region (EU), Türkiye, economic sanctions, exclusive economic zone, international sanctions, natural person, offshore drilling








C_2021421EN.01000201.xml










18.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/2






Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1657, and in Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1890, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1655
(2021/C 421/02)
The following information is brought to the attention of M. Mehmet Ferruh AKALIN (n. 1) and M. Ali Coscun NAMOGLU (n. 2), persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/1894 (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1657 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1890 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1655 (4) concerning restrictive measures in view of Turkey’s unauthorised drilling activities in the Eastern Mediterranean.
The Council intends to maintain the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned persons and entities with new statements of reasons. Those persons are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statements of reasons for their designation, before 25 October 2021, to the following address:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




RELEX.1.C




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu


(1)  OJ L 291, 12.11.2019, p. 47.

(2)  OJ L 372 I , 9.11.2020, p. 16.

(3)  OJ L 291, 12.11.2019, p. 3.

(4)  OJ L 372 I , 9.11.2020, p. 1.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/1825 of 18 October 2021 amending Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 concerning restrictive measures against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda and persons, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, natural person, terrorism








L_2021369EN.01001401.xml










19.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 369/14








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2021/1825
of 18 October 2021
         
amending Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 concerning restrictive measures against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda and persons, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 20 September 2016, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 (1).












(2)


The restrictive measures set out in Article 2(2) and Article 3(3) and (4) of Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 apply until 31 October 2021. On the basis of a review of that Decision, the restrictive measures should be extended until 31 October 2022.












(3)


Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 6 of Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:






‘5.


The measures referred to in Article 2(2) and Article 3(3) and (4) shall apply until 31 October 2022.’.






Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Luxembourg, 18 October 2021.


For the Council


The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES
            





(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/1693 of 20 September 2016 concerning restrictive measures against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda and persons, groups, undertakings and entities associated with them and repealing Common Position 2002/402/CFSP (OJ L 255, 21.9.2016, p. 25).
Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/1826 of 18 October 2021 amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Burundi
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Burundi, EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








L_2021369EN.01001501.xml










19.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 369/15








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2021/1826
of 18 October 2021
         
amending Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Burundi


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 1 October 2015, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763 (1), concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Burundi.












(2)


On the basis of a review of Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763, the restrictive measures should be renewed until 31 October 2022.












(3)


Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 6 of Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:


                  ‘This Decision shall apply until 31 October 2022.’.



Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Luxembourg, 18 October 2021.


For the Council


The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES
            





(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/1763 of 1 October 2015 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Burundi (OJ L 257, 2.10.2015, p. 37).
Case T-671/21: Action brought on 18 October 2021 — NFL Properties Europe v EUIPO — Groupe Duval (DUUUVAL)
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, broadcasting, cultural event, professional sport, registered trade mark, sporting event, television, trade-mark law








C_2022011EN.01003102.xml










10.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/31






Action brought on 18 October 2021 — NFL Properties Europe v EUIPO — Groupe Duval (DUUUVAL)
(Case T-671/21)
(2022/C 11/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: NFL Properties Europe GmbH (Eschborn, Germany) (represented by: M. Kloth, R. Briske, D. Habel and M. Tillwich, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Groupe Duval (Boulogne-Billancourt, France)

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 word mark DUUUVAL — Application for registration No 18 066 416

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 August 2021 in Case R 243/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 4 August 2021;










—


order the opponent to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred in the course of the appeal proceedings.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council
Case T-685/21: Action brought on 18 October 2021 — IR v Commission
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, dependant, illness, medical report, rights of the defence








C_2022011EN.01003201.xml










10.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/32






Action brought on 18 October 2021 — IR v Commission
(Case T-685/21)
(2022/C 11/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: IR (represented by: S. Pappas and A. Pappas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 11 December 2020 by which the Brussels Settlement Office refused the renewal of the serious illness scheme in respect of the applicant’s son;










—


annul the decision of 8 July 2021 by which the appointing authority rejected the applicant’s complaint filed under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on six pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the contested decisions are based unlawfully on the second opinion of the Medical Officer.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a failure to state reasons for the contested decisions.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the contested decisions are, according to the applicant, vitiated by manifest errors of assessment and a distortion of the facts.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to good administration and the right to be heard.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the contested decisions are based unlawfully on an opinion of the Medical Council.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging breach of the administrative procedure.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 15 October 2021 2021/C 421/03
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021421EN.01000301.xml










18.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

15 October 2021
(2021/C 421/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1602 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,65 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4402 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84368 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,0288 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0729 




ISK


Iceland króna


149,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7625 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,403 




HUF


Hungarian forint


359,71 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5644 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9465 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,7132 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5640 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4342 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,0258 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6445 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5637 




KRW


South Korean won


1 371,21 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0504 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4663 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5105 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 292,60 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8241 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,903 




RUB


Russian rouble


82,6325 




THB


Thai baht


38,669 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3635 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,8542 




INR


Indian rupee


86,9670 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-672/21: Action brought on 18 October 2021 — Grupa ‘LEW’ v EUIPO — Lechwerke (GRUPALEW.)
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, decorative item, financial management, financial services, insurance, registered trade mark, sports equipment, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2021502EN.01003901.xml










13.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 502/39






Action brought on 18 October 2021 — Grupa ‘LEW’ v EUIPO — Lechwerke (GRUPALEW.)
(Case T-672/21)
(2021/C 502/58)
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Grupa ‘LEW’ S.A. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: A. Korbela, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lechwerke AG (Augsburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark GRUPALEW. — International registration designating the European Union No 1 344 392

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 August 2021 in Case R 2763/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


annul the decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO of 25 October 2019 which preceded the contested decision;










—


remit Notice of Opposition No B 002 956 640 of 13 September 2017, filed by Lechwerke AG, established in Augsburg (Germany), to EUIPO for review.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 10 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625. (1)







(1)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 of 5 March 2018 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Union trade mark, and repealing Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430 (OJ 2018 L 104, p. 1)
Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/1824 of 18 October 2021 amending Decision (CFSP) 2020/1515 establishing a European Security and Defence College (ESDC)
Date: 2021-10-18
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European school, common security and defence policy, education, operation of the Institutions, vocational training




L_2021369EN.01001301.xml










19.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 369/13








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2021/1824
of 18 October 2021
         
amending Decision (CFSP) 2020/1515 establishing a European Security and Defence College (ESDC)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Articles 28(1) and 42(4) thereof,


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 19 October 2020, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2020/1515 (1), establishing a European Security and Defence College (ESDC).












(2)


A new financial reference amount for the period from 1 January 2022 to 31 December 2022 should be established.












(3)


Decision (CFSP) 2020/1515 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 16(2) of Decision (CFSP) 2020/1515 is replaced by the following:


‘2.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of the ESDC during the period from 1 January 2022 to 31 December 2022 shall be EUR 1 975 752,04.
The financial reference amount to cover the expenditure of the ESDC for subsequent periods shall be decided by the Council.’.




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




Done at Luxembourg, 18 October 2021.


For the Council


The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES
            





(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1515 of 19 October 2020 establishing a European Security and Defence College, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2016/2382 (OJ L 348, 20.10.2020, p. 1).