do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10054 – KOMBIVERKEHR / HUPAC / DX INTERMODAL JV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 430/03
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, combined transport, data transmission, economic concentration, merger control, rail transport, road transport








C_2021430EN.01000301.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 430/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10054 – KOMBIVERKEHR / HUPAC / DX INTERMODAL JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 430/03)
On 19 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 32021M10054. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-639/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 19 October 2021 — PB v Geos SAS, Geos International Consulting Limited
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, labour dispute, legal domicile, private international law








C_2022002EN.01002402.xml










3.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 2/24






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 19 October 2021 — PB v Geos SAS, Geos International Consulting Limited
(Case C-639/21)
(2022/C 2/30)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: PB

Respondents: Geos SAS, Geos International Consulting Limited

Questions referred







—


Are Article 4(1) and Article 20(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 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that, where it is claimed that a company domiciled in a Member State, and being sued by an employee before the courts of that State, is the joint employer of that employee, who was engaged by another company, that court is not required to assess at the outset whether the employee is jointly employed by those two companies in order to determine whether it has jurisdiction to rule on the claims made against them?










—


Are those articles to be interpreted as meaning that, in such a case, the autonomy of the special rules of jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment does not preclude the application of the general rule that jurisdiction lies with the courts of the Member State in which the defendant is domiciled, set out in Article 4(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012?






(1)  OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.
Case T-678/21: Action brought on 19 October 2021 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL3TOTAL)
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021502EN.01004101.xml










13.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 502/41






Action brought on 19 October 2021 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL3TOTAL)
(Case T-678/21)
(2021/C 502/61)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Mendes SA (Lugano, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Cavattoni, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Actial Farmaceutica Srl (Rome, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark VSL3TOTAL — European Union trade mark No 11 702 172

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 August 2021 in Case R 1568/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


uphold the present action;










—


annul the contested decision;










—


condemn the other party in the proceedings to bear the costs and fees.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-676/21: Action brought on 19 October 2021 — Target Brands v EUIPO — The Art Company B & S (art class)
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, clothing, electronic commerce, footwear industry, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_2021502EN.01003902.xml










13.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 502/39






Action brought on 19 October 2021 — Target Brands v EUIPO — The Art Company B & S (art class)
(Case T-676/21)
(2021/C 502/59)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Target Brands, Inc. (Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: R. Kunze, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: The Art Company B & S, SA (Quel, Spain)

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 figurative mark art class — Application for registration No 16 888 737

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 August 2021 in Case R 1596/2019-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal as well as the Opposition Division.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-208/20: Order of the General Court of 19 October 2021 — JH v Europol (Action for damages — Civil service — Temporary staff — Europol — Probative value of the evidence — No act adversely affecting the applicant — Irregular nature of the pre-litigation procedure — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: disciplinary proceedings, dismissal, evidence, reassignment, servant (EU), sick leave








C_2021502EN.01002802.xml










13.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 502/28






Order of the General Court of 19 October 2021 — JH v Europol
(Case T-208/20) (1)

(Action for damages - Civil service - Temporary staff - Europol - Probative value of the evidence - No act adversely affecting the applicant - Irregular nature of the pre-litigation procedure - Inadmissibility)
(2021/C 502/44)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: JH (represented by: M. Quaas and T. Flachsbarth, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (represented by: O. Sajin and A. Ketels, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of, first, Europol’s order of 2 April 2019 to relieve him from office with immediate effect and, second, the failure to investigate a complaint against him in accordance with the applicable provisions.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


JH shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 18 October 2021 2021/C 423/07
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021423EN.01000901.xml










19.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/9






Euro exchange rates (1)

18 October 2021
(2021/C 423/07)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1604 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,46 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4400 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84438 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,0375 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0712 




ISK


Iceland króna


150,00 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7643 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,453 




HUF


Hungarian forint


361,35 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5787 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9490 




TRY


Turkish lira


10,7740 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5707 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4384 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,0268 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6436 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5659 




KRW


South Korean won


1 377,90 




ZAR


South African rand


17,1217 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4617 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5085 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 371,79 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8406 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,025 




RUB


Russian rouble


82,7185 




THB


Thai baht


38,827 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3651 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,7177 




INR


Indian rupee


87,4083 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-640/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Cluj (Romania) lodged on 19 October 2021 — SC Zes Zollner Electronic SRL v Direcția Regională Vamală Cluj — Biroul Vamal de Frontieră Aeroport Cluj Napoca
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, customs document, customs formalities, delivery, penalty








C_2022064EN.01001302.xml










7.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 64/13






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Cluj (Romania) lodged on 19 October 2021 — SC Zes Zollner Electronic SRL v Direcția Regională Vamală Cluj — Biroul Vamal de Frontieră Aeroport Cluj Napoca
(Case C-640/21)
(2022/C 64/21)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: SC Zes Zollner Electronic SRL

Respondent: Direcția Regională Vamală Cluj — Biroul Vamal de Frontieră Aeroport Cluj Napoca

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 173 or Article 174 of Regulation No 952/2013 (1) apply where the consignee of the goods reports a quantity in excess of that stated in the original customs declaration?










2.


Does the expression ‘goods other than those which [the customs declaration] originally covered’ within the meaning of Article 173 of the regulation refer to goods that differ quantitatively or qualitatively, or both?










3.


In the case of a quantitative difference that exceeds the quantity of goods stated in the customs declaration, does the consignee of the goods have any procedural remedy under the [abovementioned] regulation enabling the consignee to correct the errors without incurring administrative or criminal penalties?






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ 2013 L 269, p. 1).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10389 – PAI PARTNERS / PASUBIO) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 458/01
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: business management, consultancy, economic concentration, investment company, leather industry, merger control








C_2021458EN.01000101.xml










12.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 458/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10389 – PAI PARTNERS / PASUBIO)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 458/01)
On 19 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 32021M10389. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Notice for the attention of certain persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria 2021/C 423/06
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Syria, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








C_2021423EN.01000801.xml










19.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/8






Notice for the attention of certain persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria
(2021/C 423/06)
The following information is brought to the attention of Dr. Jassem Mohammad ZAKARIA (No 167), Mr. Abdullah Abdullah (No 229), Mr. Imad Abdullah SARA (No 259), Mr. Talal AL-BARAZI (a.k.a. Barazi) (No 296), Mr. Malloul (a.k.a. Maloul) HUSSEIN (a.k.a. AL-HUSSEIN) (No 309), persons appearing in Annex I to Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP (1) and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 (2) concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.
The Council intends to maintain the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned persons with amended statements of reasons. Those persons and entity are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the proposed amended statement of reasons for maintaining their designation, by 26 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
The persons concerned may submit at any time a request to the Council, together with any supporting documentation, that the decision to maintain them on the list should be reconsidered, to the address or e-mail address provided above. Such requests will be considered when they are received.


(1)  OJ L 147, 1.6.2013, p. 14.

(2)  OJ L 16, 19.1.2012, p. 1.
Notice regarding the adaptation in line with inflation of the amounts laid down in the Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) 2021/C 423/12
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, European Commission
Subjects: approximation of laws, financial solvency, freedom to provide services, inflation, insurance company, insurance law, life assurance, right of establishment








C_2021423EN.01002501.xml










19.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/25






Notice regarding the adaptation in line with inflation of the amounts laid down in the Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II)
(2021/C 423/12)
Pursuant to Article 300 of Directive 2009/138/EC (1), the amounts expressed in euro in the Directive shall be revised every five years, by increasing the base amount in euro by the percentage change in the Harmonised Indices of Consumer Prices of all Member States, as published by the Commission (Eurostat) starting from 31 December 2015 until the date of revision and rounded up to a multiple of EUR 100 000, as long as the percentage change is not below 5 %. Therefore, the first revision of the amounts should be performed considering the increase of the mentioned Index with reference to the period between 31 December 2015 and 31 December 2020.
As a result of the review, the revised amounts are the following:






a)


In Article 4(1), as regards the conditions for exclusion from scope due to size:






—


in point (a), EUR 5 million is replaced by EUR 5 400 000;










—


in points (b) and (c), EUR 25 million is replaced by EUR 26 600 000; and










—


in point (e), EUR 0,5 million is replaced by EUR 600 000 and EUR 2,5 million is replaced by EUR 2 700 000.














b)


In Article 13, as regards the definition of large risks laid down in point (27), under letter (c):






—


in sub-point (i), EUR 6,2 million is replaced by EUR 6 600 000; and










—


in sub-point (ii), EUR 12,8 million is replaced by EUR 13 600 000.














c)


In Article 129(1), point (d) as regards the absolute floor for the calculation of the Minimum Capital Requirement:






—


in sub-point (i), EUR 2 500 000 is replaced by EUR 2 700 000 and EUR 3 700 000 is replaced by EUR 4 000 000;










—


in sub-point (ii), EUR 3 700 000 is replaced by EUR 4 000 000; and










—


in sub-point (iii), EUR 3 600 000 is replaced by EUR 3 900 000 and EUR 1 200 000 is replaced by EUR 1 300 000.








The revised amounts shall be implemented by Member States by 19 October 2022.


(1)  Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1).
Case T-613/21: Action brought on 19 October 2021 — XH v Commission
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, incapacity for work, indemnification, legal aid, protection of privacy, right to justice, sick leave, staff regulations (EU)








C_2022037EN.01003401.xml










24.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 37/34






Action brought on 19 October 2021 — XH v Commission
(Case T-613/21)
(2022/C 37/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: XH (represented by: E. Auleytner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 4 December 2020 concerning the refusal of the applicant’s request for assistance and the decision of the Appointing Authority in response to the complaint filed by the applicant;










—


annul the decision of 26 May 2021 concerning the opening of the invalidity procedure and the decision of the Appointing Authority in response to the complaint filed by the applicant;










—


compensate the applicant for loss and damages;










—


order the defendant to pay all costs and expenses.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging error of law and the irregularity of the contested procedure: the violation of Article 12a and 24 of the Staff Regulations in the light of Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular violation of the duty of care and the principle of sound administration contained in Article 41 of the Charter.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging the violation of Articles 12a, 24, and 59-60 of the Staff Regulations, by setting clearly unattainable objectives requiring the applicant to provide work during sickness leave with 100 % incapacity for work.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging violation of Article 59 of the Staff Regulations in the light of Articles 12a and 24 thereof — opening of the invalidity procedure without the required amount of the sick leave at the moment of the opening.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging the violation of Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Council Decision (EU) 2021/1869 of 19 October 2021 amending Decision 1999/70/EC concerning the external auditors of the national central banks, as regards the external auditors of the Banca d’Italia
Date: 2021-10-19
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European System of Central Banks, Italy, accountant, auditing, central bank, euro area




L_2021379EN.01000601.xml










26.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 379/6








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2021/1869
of 19 October 2021
         
amending Decision 1999/70/EC concerning the external auditors of the national central banks, as regards the external auditors of the Banca d’Italia


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Protocol No 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,


Having regard to the Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 7 September 2021 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of the Banca d’Italia (ECB/2021/41) (1),

Whereas:







(1)


The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the Governing Council of the ECB and approved by the Council of the European Union.












(2)


The mandate of the current external auditors of the Banca d’Italia, BDO Italia S.p.A., ended after the audit for the financial year 2020. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors as from the financial year 2021.












(3)


The Banca d’Italia has selected Deloitte & Touche S.p.A. as its external auditors for the financial years 2021 to 2022.












(4)


The Governing Council of the ECB recommended that Deloitte & Touche S.p.A. be appointed as the external auditors of the Banca d’Italia for the financial years 2021 to 2022.












(5)


Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC (2) should be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 1 of Decision 1999/70/EC, paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:


‘6.   Deloitte & Touche S.p.A. are hereby approved as the external auditors of the Banca d’Italia for the financial years 2021 to 2022.’.




Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification.


Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the ECB.




Done at Luxembourg, 19 October 2021.


For the Council


The President

G. DOVŽAN
            





(1)  
            OJ C 370, 15.9.2021, p. 1.

(2)  Council Decision 1999/70/EC of 25 January 1999 concerning the external auditors of the national central banks (OJ L 22, 29.1.1999, p. 69).