do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Annexes IV and V to Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic pollutants’ (COM(2021) 656 final — 2021/0340 (COD))
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: dangerous substance, environmental protection, international convention, market approval, organic chemical, organic pollution, pollution control measures, protocol to an agreement, public health, waste management








C_2022152EN.01019701.xml










6.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/197






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Annexes IV and V to Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic pollutants’
(COM(2021) 656 final — 2021/0340 (COD))
(2022/C 152/33)






Referral


European Parliament, 10.11.2021
Council, 12.11.2021




Legal basis


Article 192(1) and Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment




Adopted at plenary


8.12.2021




Plenary session No


565




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


230/0/3




Since the Committee endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 565th plenary session of 8 and 9 December 2021 (meeting of 8 December), by 230 votes in favour with 3 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 8 December 2021.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG
Case T-247/20: Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — JP v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Documents relating to Open Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 7 in the field of taxation — Restriction of the scope of the application for access — Refusal to grant access — Article 4(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process — Article 6 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations — Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings — Partial access — Non-contractual liability)
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, administrator, competition (EU), damages, recruitment








C_2022073EN.01003601.xml










14.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/36






Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — JP v Commission
(Case T-247/20) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to Open Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 7 in the field of taxation - Restriction of the scope of the application for access - Refusal to grant access - Article 4(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001 - Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process - Article 6 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations - Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings - Partial access - Non-contractual liability)
(2022/C 73/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: JP (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and D. Milanowska, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 1195 final of 24 February 2020 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), as well as a claim for compensation pursuant to Article 268 TFEU for the non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2020) 1195 final of 24 February 2020 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in so far as it refused to grant JP access to the questions set out in the sections of the evaluation by the assessors of her answers during the field-related interview (Document No 1) headed ‘Anchor’ and ‘Possible questions’ and refused to grant access to the questions set out in the sections of the evaluation by the assessors of her answers during the general competency-based interview (Document No 2) headed ‘Situation 1’, ‘Situation 2’ and ‘Situation 3’ in the context of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 6.7.2020.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10523 – NORDIC CAPITAL / ROTHSCHILD / TA ASSOCIATES / RLDATIX) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 509/06
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: cloud computing, consultancy, economic concentration, health care, health technology, investment company, merger control, software








C_2021509EN.01000601.xml










17.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 509/6






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10523 – NORDIC CAPITAL / ROTHSCHILD / TA ASSOCIATES / RLDATIX)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 509/06)
On 8 December 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 32021M10523. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-724/21 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — IL and Others v Parliament (Application for interim measures — Civil Service — Conditions of access to the Parliament’s buildings at its three places of work in connection with the health crisis — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — No urgency)
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, coronavirus disease, data protection, disease prevention, health certificate, health control, personal data, protection of privacy








C_2022095EN.01003802.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/38






Order of the President of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — IL and Others v Parliament
(Case T-724/21 R)
(Application for interim measures - Civil Service - Conditions of access to the Parliament’s buildings at its three places of work in connection with the health crisis - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency)
(2022/C 95/54)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: IL and 81 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the order (represented by: P. de Bandt, M. Gherghinaru and L. Panepinto, lawyers

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: D. Boytha, S. Bukšek Tomac and L. Darie, acting as Agents

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for the suspension of operation of the decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 27 October 2021 on the exceptional health and safety rules governing access to the Parliament’s buildings at its three places of work.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The order of 15 November 2021, IL and Others v Parliament (T-724/21 R) is set aside.










3.


The costs are reserved.
Case C-155/21: Order of the President of the Court of 8 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea Hovrätt — Sweden) — Republiken Italien v Athena Investments A/S (formerly Greentech Energy Systems A/S) and Others
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, European Energy Charter, arbitration, international arbitration, investment, limitation of legal proceedings, primacy of EU law








C_2022198EN.01002901.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/29






Order of the President of the Court of 8 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea Hovrätt — Sweden) — Republiken Italien v Athena Investments A/S (formerly Greentech Energy Systems A/S) and Others
(Case C-155/21) (1)

(2022/C 198/40)
Language of the case: Swedish
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 206, 31.5.2021.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 7 December 2021 2021/C 492/03
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021492EN.01000501.xml










8.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 492/5






Euro exchange rates (1)

7 December 2021
(2021/C 492/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1256 




JPY


Japanese yen


127,83 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4363 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84933 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2573 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0414 




ISK


Iceland króna


147,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1900 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,465 




HUF


Hungarian forint


365,88 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5942 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9488 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,3690 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5836 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4258 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7753 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6607 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5380 




KRW


South Korean won


1 325,50 




ZAR


South African rand


17,9612 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1671 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5205 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 175,52 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7635 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,772 




RUB


Russian rouble


83,7755 




THB


Thai baht


37,910 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3327 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,8972 




INR


Indian rupee


84,8780 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-762/21: Action brought on 8 December 2021 — C&C IP UK v EUIPO — Tipico Group (t)
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beer, catering industry, hotel industry, non-alcoholic beverage, property leasing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022064EN.01002902.xml










7.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 64/29






Action brought on 8 December 2021 — C&C IP UK v EUIPO — Tipico Group (t)
(Case T-762/21)
(2022/C 64/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: C&C IP UK Ltd (Bristol, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tipico Group ltd. (St. Julian’s, Malta)

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 Union figurative mark t — Application for registration No 17 915 463

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 September 2021 in Case R 2326/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


dismiss the appeal brought by the Tipico Group Ltd. against the decision of the EUIPO’s Opposition Division of 19 October 2020 in Case B 3 080 138;










—


order EUIPO, and Tipico Group Ltd. if it should intervene in these proceedings, to bear the costs





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 8 (1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10504 – EQT / H&F / ZOOPLUS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 509/04
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronic commerce, investment company, merger control, pet food, pet shop, private investment








C_2021509EN.01000401.xml










17.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 509/4






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10504 – EQT / H&F / ZOOPLUS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 509/04)
On 8 December 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 32021M10504. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-519/21: Order of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — VY v Commission
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: equal treatment, marriage, survivor's benefit








C_2022095EN.01004601.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/46






Order of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — VY v Commission
(Case T-519/21) (1)

(2022/C 95/66)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
Case T-556/19: Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — Cyprus v EUIPO — Fontana Food (GRILLOUMI) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark GRILLOUMI — Earlier national certification word marks ΧΑΛΛΟΥΜΙ HALLOUMI — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Similarity between services and goods — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, catering industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022073EN.01003401.xml










14.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/34






Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — Cyprus v EUIPO — Fontana Food (GRILLOUMI)
(Case T-556/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark GRILLOUMI - Earlier national certification word marks ΧΑΛΛΟΥΜΙ HALLOUMI - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Similarity between services and goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 73/39)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Cyprus (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, S. Baran, Barrister, and V. Marsland, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Fontana Food AB (Tyresö, Sweden) (represented by: P. Nihlmark and L. Zacharoff, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 May 2019 (Case R 1284/2018-4) relating to opposition proceedings between the Republic of Cyprus and Fontana Food.

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 29 May 2019 (Case R 1284/2018-4);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Republic of Cyprus;










3.


Orders Fontana Food AB to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Case C-766/21 P: Appeal brought on 8 December 2021 by the European Parliament against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 29 September 2021 in Case T-384/19, Parliament v Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA and Others
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: flood, insurance claim, insurance indemnity, insurance law, interpretation of the law








C_2022119EN.01002101.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/21






Appeal brought on 8 December 2021 by the European Parliament against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 29 September 2021 in Case T-384/19, Parliament v Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA and Others
(Case C-766/21 P)
(2022/C 119/28)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Paladini and B. Schäfer, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA, Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA, La Luxembourgeoise SA, Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij NV

Form of order sought







—


annul the second and fourth paragraphs of the operative part of the judgment under appeal;










—


refer the case back to the General Court;










—


reserve costs, with the exception of those which are subject to the third paragraph of the operative part of the judgment under appeal.




In the alternative,






—


annul the second and fourth paragraphs of the operative part of the judgment under appeal;










—


grant the form of order sought by the European Parliament at first instance in respect of Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA, Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA and La Luxembourgeoise SA.





Grounds of appeal and main arguments

In support of its appeal, the European Parliament raises three grounds of appeal.
The first ground of appeal alleges an error of law consisting in the infringement of the principles of interpretation of EU law. The Parliament considers that the General Court disregarded, in particular, the rule of interpretation consisting in taking account of the purpose of the contract and the context in which its terms, and more specifically the term ‘flooding’, appear. In the alternative, the Parliament takes the view that the General Court distorted the exclusion clause relating to flooding.
The second ground of appeal alleges an error relating to reasoning of the judgment under appeal, which is, in the Parliament’s view, vitiated by a contradiction in the reasoning of the General Court on the interpretation of the term ‘flooding’.
Thirdly, the Parliament considers that the judgment under appeal contains several distortions of the facts and evidence: the General Court distorted the Parliament’s position on the interpretation of the term ‘flooding’; it assessed the situation of the building site at the time of the damage in a manifestly erroneous manner, and also distorted the findings of the expert report on the causes of the damage.
Case T-623/20: Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — Sun West and Others v Commission (State aid — Production of electricity by photovoltaic installations — Obligation to purchase the electricity at a higher price than the market price — Rejection of a complaint — Second subparagraph of Article 12(1) and Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589)
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, control of State aid, electrical energy, energy production, market prices, photovoltaic cell, price of energy








C_2022073EN.01003801.xml










14.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/38






Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — Sun West and Others v Commission
(Case T-623/20) (1)

(State aid - Production of electricity by photovoltaic installations - Obligation to purchase the electricity at a higher price than the market price - Rejection of a complaint - Second subparagraph of Article 12(1) and Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589)
(2022/C 73/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Sun West (Saint-Allouestre, France), JB Solar (Saint-Allouestre), Azimut56 (Saint-Allouestre) (represented by: S. Manna, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and B. Stromsky, Acting as agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 28 July 2020 rejecting the applicants’ complaint concerning State aid granted unlawfully by the French Republic to photovoltaic energy producers under pricing decrees of 10 July 2006, and 12 January and 31 August 2010, in order to have the aid declared incompatible with the internal market.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sun West, JB Solar and Azimut56 to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 414, 30.11.2020.
Case T-620/20: Order of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — Alessio and Others v ECB (Action for annulment — Economic and monetary union — Banking union — Recovery and resolution of credit institutions — Early intervention measures — Decision of the ECB to place Banca Carige under temporary administration — Subsequent extension decisions — Time limit for bringing proceedings — Delay — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2021-12-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, Italy, Liguria, bank, banking supervision, company in difficulties, limitation of legal proceedings








C_2022095EN.01003602.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/36






Order of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — Alessio and Others v ECB
(Case T-620/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Economic and monetary union - Banking union - Recovery and resolution of credit institutions - Early intervention measures - Decision of the ECB to place Banca Carige under temporary administration - Subsequent extension decisions - Time limit for bringing proceedings - Delay - Inadmissibility)
(2022/C 95/50)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicants: Roberto Alessio (Turin, Italy) and the 56 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the order (represented by: M. Condinanzi, L. Boggio, M. Cataldo and A. Califano, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: C. Hernández Saseta and A. Pizzolla, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment, first, of the ECB’s decision of 1 January 2019 placing Banca Carige SpA under temporary administration and, secondly, of its decision of 29 March 2019, extending the period of the temporary administration, and of the subsequent extension decisions.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the European Commission’s application for leave to intervene.










3.


Mr Roberto Alessio and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).










4.


The Commission shall bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 390, 16.11.2020.