do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-778/21 P: Appeal brought on 14 December 2021 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 29 September 2021 in Joined Cases T-344/19 and T-356/19, Front Polisario v Council
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Morocco, Western Sahara, access to the courts, agreement (EU), customary law, international law, judicial review, rebel government








C_2022119EN.01002201.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/22






Appeal brought on 14 December 2021 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 29 September 2021 in Joined Cases T-344/19 and T-356/19, Front Polisario v Council
(Case C-778/21 P)
(2022/C 119/29)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet, F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Front populaire pour la libération de la Saguia el-Hamra et du Rio de oro (Front Polisario), Council of the European Union, Kingdom of Spain, French Republic, Chambre des pêches maritimes de la Méditerranée, Chambre des pêches maritimes de l’Atlantique Nord, Chambre des pêches maritimes de l’Atlantique Centre, Chambre des pêches maritimes de l’Atlantique Sud

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside paragraphs 1 and 2 of the operative part of the judgment under appeal and consequently;










—


dismiss the action brought at first instance by the Front Polisario, or, if the state of proceedings does not permit the Court of Justice to give final judgment in the matter, refer the case back to the General Court;










—


order the Front Polisario to pay the costs of both sets of proceedings in their entirety.





Grounds of appeal and main arguments







—


First ground of appeal: errors in law based on the Front Polisario’s lack of capacity to be a party to legal proceedings.










—


Second ground of appeal: errors in law based on the Front Polisario’s lack of direct concern.










—


Third ground of appeal: errors in law based on the Front Polisario’s lack of individual concern.










—


Fourth ground of appeal: errors in law regarding the scope of judicial review, the institutions’ margin of appreciation and the need to find that there had been a manifest error; regarding the consent of the people of Western Sahara not being a requirement; regarding the fact that the concept of consent adopted is too strict and theoretical, that the consultation that obtained the favourable opinion is considered insufficient and that the examination of the benefits is rejected; regarding the Front Polisario’s identification as the entity that would be responsible for giving such consent, given its limited status and representativeness.










—


Fifth ground of appeal: errors in law regarding the possibility of relying on customary international law when examining the validity of an EU act.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9969 – VEOLIA / SUEZ) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 93/01
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy consumption, energy distribution, merger control, waste management, water management








C_2022093EN.01000101.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9969 – VEOLIA / SUEZ)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 93/01)
On 14 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) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in French language 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 32021M9969. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10513 – ACCIAIERIA ARVEDI / FINARVEDI / ACCIAI SPECIALI TERNI / THYSSENKRUPP STAINLESS / THYSSENKRUPP STAINLESS TURKEY METAL SANAYI VE T) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 512/02
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, iron and steel industry, merger control








C_2021512EN.01000201.xml










20.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 512/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10513 – ACCIAIERIA ARVEDI / FINARVEDI / ACCIAI SPECIALI TERNI / THYSSENKRUPP STAINLESS / THYSSENKRUPP STAINLESS TURKEY METAL SANAYI VE T)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 512/02)
On 14 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 32021M10513. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 January 2022 (Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1.)) 2021/C 504/20
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, State aid, interest, reimbursement of aid








C_2021504EN.01004701.xml










14.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 504/47






Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 January 2022


(Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (1))

(2021/C 504/20)
Base rates calculated in accordance with the Communication from the Commission on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates (OJ C 14, 19.1.2008, p. 6.). Depending on the use of the reference rate, the appropriate margins have still to be added as defined in this communication. For the discount rate this means that a margin of 100 basispoints has to be added. The Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 of 30 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 foresees that, unless otherwise provided for in a specific decision, the recovery rate will also be calculated by adding 100 basispoints to the base rate.
Modified rates are indicated in bold.
Previous table published in OJ C 472, 23.11.2021, p. 7.


































From


To


AT


BE


BG


CY


CZ


DE


DK


EE


EL


ES


FI


FR


HR


HU


IE


IT


LT


LU


LV


MT


NL


PL


PT


RO


SE


SI


SK


UK




1.1.2022


…



-0,49 




-0,49 




0,00 




-0,49 




2,49 




-0,49 




-0,01 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




0,26 




2,38 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




-0,49 




1,21 




-0,49 




2,27 




-0,03 




-0,49 




-0,49 




0,51 







(1)  OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1.
Judgment of the Court of 14 December 2021 in Case E-2/21 Norep AS v Haugen Gruppen AS (Self-employed commercial agents – Directive 86/653/EEC – Article 1(2) – Definition of ‘commercial agent’ – Negotiation of the sale or purchase of goods on behalf of the principal) 2022/C 153/08
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, purchase, sale, sales representative, self-employed person








C_2022153EN.01001401.xml










7.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/14






JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 14 December 2021
in Case E-2/21
Norep AS v Haugen Gruppen AS


(Self-employed commercial agents – Directive 86/653/EEC – Article 1(2) – Definition of ‘commercial agent’ – Negotiation of the sale or purchase of goods on behalf of the principal)


(2022/C 153/08)
In Case E-2/21, Norep As v Haugen Gruppen AS – REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by the Supreme Court of Norway (Norges Høyesterett) concerning the interpretation of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, the Court, composed of Páll Hreinsson, President (Judge-Rapporteur), Per Christiansen and Bernd Hammermann, Judges, gave judgment on 14 December 2021, the operative part of which is as follows:






1.


Article 1(2) of Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, and in particular the term ‘negotiate’, should be interpreted as not necessarily presupposing the agent’s direct involvement with the placing of orders by customers with the principal, or excluding a scenario in which orders go directly from customers to the principal.










2.


Sales-related activity should be deemed to be negotiation for the purposes of Article 1(2) of Directive 86/653/EEC if it is specifically undertaken with a view to achieving the conclusion of contracts of sale or purchase of goods by the principal, and if the agent acts as an intermediary between the principal and his customers.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10536 – TOTALENERGIES / THREE GORGES CORPORATION / JV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 512 I/01
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electric vehicle, energy industry, gas industry, hydraulic energy, investment company, merger control, oil industry, renewable energy, subsidiary








CI2021512EN.01000101.xml










20.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 512/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10536 – TOTALENERGIES / THREE GORGES CORPORATION / JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 512 I/01)
On 14 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 32021M10536. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 13 December 2021 2021/C 504/18
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021504EN.01004501.xml










14.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 504/45






Euro exchange rates (1)

13 December 2021
(2021/C 504/18)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1278 




JPY


Japanese yen


128,19 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4362 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85158 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2310 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0418 




ISK


Iceland króna


148,00 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1598 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,401 




HUF


Hungarian forint


367,07 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6221 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9494 




TRY


Turkish lira


16,0525 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5795 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4388 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7967 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6651 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5420 




KRW


South Korean won


1 333,60 




ZAR


South African rand


17,9694 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1777 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5210 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 155,54 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7678 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,731 




RUB


Russian rouble


82,8238 




THB


Thai baht


37,612 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3190 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,5354 




INR


Indian rupee


85,4225 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-768/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden (Germany) lodged on 14 December 2021 — TR v Land Hessen
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data protection, data-processing law, personal data, supervisory body








C_2022138EN.01000901.xml










28.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/9






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden (Germany) lodged on 14 December 2021 — TR v Land Hessen
(Case C-768/21)
(2022/C 138/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: TR

Defendant: Land Hessen

Question referred

Are Article 57(1)(a) and (f) and Article 58(2)(a) to (j) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, (1) read in combination with Article 77(1) thereof, to be understood as meaning that, where the supervisory authority finds that data processing has infringed the data subject’s rights, the supervisory authority must always take action in accordance with Article 58(2) of that regulation?


(1)  Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).
Case T-776/21: Action brought on 14 December 2021 — Gameageventures v EUIPO (GAME TOURNAMENTS)
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, automatic game, broadcasting, electronic game, registered trade mark, software, sporting event, trade-mark law, virtual community








C_2022064EN.01003101.xml










7.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 64/31






Action brought on 14 December 2021 — Gameageventures v EUIPO (GAME TOURNAMENTS)
(Case T-776/21)
(2022/C 64/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Gameageventures LLP (Folkestone, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Santos Rodríguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark GAME TOURNAMENTS– Application for registration No 18 207 605

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2021 in Case R 211/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of the obligation to state reason and of the right to be heard;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of the principles of equal treatment and of sound administration.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2270 of 14 December 2021 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Lički škripavac’ (PGI)
Date: 2021-12-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: County of Karlovac, County of Lika-Senj, County of Zadar, Croatia, cows’ milk cheese, designation of origin, labelling, product designation, soft cheese








L_2021457EN.01000401.xml










21.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 457/4








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2021/2270
of 14 December 2021
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications ‘Lički škripavac’ (PGI)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Croatia’s application to register the name ‘Lički škripavac’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Lički škripavac’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Lički škripavac’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.3 – Cheeses, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


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




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 December 2021.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 325, 13.8.2021, p. 22.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).