do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10488 – FAURECIA / HELLA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 514/03
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, light-duty vehicle, merger control, motor car, motor vehicle industry








C_2021514EN.01000301.xml










21.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 514/3






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10488 – FAURECIA / HELLA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 514/03)

1.   
On 10 December 2021, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Faurecia SE (‘Faurecia’) (France),










—


HELLA GmbH & Co. KGaA (‘Hella’) (Germany).




Faurecia acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Hella.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 27 September 2021.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Faurecia: the development, manufacture, and supply of components for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles. Its four main business areas are seating, interiors, clean mobility (including solutions to reduce emissions and improve energy efficiency and acoustic performance), and electronics (in-vehicle infotainment, human machine interfaces and connectivity),










—


for Hella: the development and production of automotive parts, in particular lighting and electronic products.






3.   

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.



4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.10488 – FAURECIA / HELLA
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 22964301
Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-796/19: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — HB v Commission (Public service contracts — Provision of technical assistance services to the Ukrainian authorities — Decision to reduce the amount of the contract and to recover the amounts already paid — Action for annulment and for damages — Act forming part of a purely contractual framework from which it is inseparable — No arbitration clause — Inadmissibility — No heads of damage that are separable from the contract)
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: arbitration clause, award of contract, claim, damages, interest, reduced price, reimbursement of aid, services contract








C_2022095EN.01002701.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/27






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — HB v Commission
(Case T-796/19) (1)

(Public service contracts - Provision of technical assistance services to the Ukrainian authorities - Decision to reduce the amount of the contract and to recover the amounts already paid - Action for annulment and for damages - Act forming part of a purely contractual framework from which it is inseparable - No arbitration clause - Inadmissibility - No heads of damage that are separable from the contract)
(2022/C 95/35)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: HB (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz, J. Estrada de Solà and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Re:







(i)


Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 7318 final of 15 October 2019 to reduce the amounts due under contract TACIS/2006/101-510 and to recover the amounts unduly paid and (ii) application under the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU seeking, first, reimbursement of any amounts recovered by the Commission on the basis of that decision, together with late-payment interest, and second, symbolic compensation for the non-material harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.





Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action as inadmissible, in so far as it seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 7318 final of 15 October 2019 to reduce the amounts due under contract TACIS/2006/101-510 and to recover the amounts unduly paid;










2.


Dismisses the action as unfounded, in so far as it seeks to establish non-contractual liability on the part of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.
Case C-524/20: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Městský soud v Praze — Czech Republic) — Vítkovice Steel a.s. v Ministerstvo životního prostředí (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Directive 2003/87/EC — Article 11(3) — Decision 2011/278/EU — Article 3(b) and Article 10(2)(a) — Product benchmark sub-installation — Decision 2013/448/EU — Validity — Installation using a basic oxygen furnace — Hot metal — Input from a third-party installation — Refusal to allocate emission allowances — Admissibility — Failure by the applicant in the main proceedings to bring an action for annulment)
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, EU emission allowance, greenhouse gas, iron and steel-working machinery, metallurgical industry, reduction of gas emissions, tradeable emission permit








C_2022084EN.01001901.xml










21.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 84/19






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Městský soud v Praze — Czech Republic) — Vítkovice Steel a.s. v Ministerstvo životního prostředí
(Case C-524/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Directive 2003/87/EC - Article 11(3) - Decision 2011/278/EU - Article 3(b) and Article 10(2)(a) - Product benchmark sub-installation - Decision 2013/448/EU - Validity - Installation using a basic oxygen furnace - Hot metal - Input from a third-party installation - Refusal to allocate emission allowances - Admissibility - Failure by the applicant in the main proceedings to bring an action for annulment)
(2022/C 84/22)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Městský soud v Praze

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Vítkovice Steel a.s.

Defendant: Ministerstvo životního prostředí

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(1) and the third subparagraph of Article 1(2) of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council must be interpreted as not permitting the free allocation to the installation at issue in the main proceedings of allowances based on the ‘hot metal’ product benchmark, on the basis of a new application from the Czech Republic, even if double counting of emissions and double allocation of allowances are excluded.


(1)  OJ C 443, 21.12.2020.
Case C-808/21: Action brought on 21 December 2021 — European Commission v Czech Republic
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: discrimination on the basis of nationality, infringement of EU law, nationality, political parties, residence, right to stand for election, right to vote








C_2022109EN.01001801.xml










7.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/18






Action brought on 21 December 2021 — European Commission v Czech Republic
(Case C-808/21)
(2022/C 109/25)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Ondrůšek and J. Tomkin, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Declare that, by denying citizens of the Union who are not nationals of the Czech Republic but who are resident in the Czech Republic the right to become members of a political party or political movement, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










—


Order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Under Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, every citizen of the Union residing in a Member State of which he or she is not a national is to have the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections and in elections to the European Parliament in the Member State in which he or she resides, under the same conditions as nationals of that State.
In the Commission’s opinion, having regard to the fact that citizens of the Union who are not nationals of the Czech Republic but who are resident in the Czech Republic do not have the right to become members of political parties or political movements, those citizens of the Union cannot exercise the political rights conferred on them under Article 22 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union under the same conditions as nationals of the Czech Republic.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 20 December 2021 2021/C 514/02
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021514EN.01000201.xml










21.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 514/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

20 December 2021
(2021/C 514/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1273 




JPY


Japanese yen


127,98 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4363 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85205 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,3010 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0408 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1915 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,234 




HUF


Hungarian forint


366,69 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6337 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9486 




TRY


Turkish lira


20,0434 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5855 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4569 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7943 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6778 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5415 




KRW


South Korean won


1 343,40 




ZAR


South African rand


17,8271 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1882 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5150 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 244,16 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7645 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,256 




RUB


Russian rouble


83,5900 




THB


Thai baht


37,889 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,4219 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,4407 




INR


Indian rupee


85,5025 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-177/17: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — EKETA v Commission (Arbitration clause — Ask-it contract concluded under the Sixth Framework Programme — Eligible costs — Debit note issued by the Commission for the recovery of amounts advanced — Reliability of the time records — Conflict of interests — Subcontracting)
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, arbitration clause, conflict of interest, debt, expenditure, financial aid, reimbursement of aid, subcontracting








C_2022095EN.01002201.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/22






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — EKETA v Commission
(Case T-177/17) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Ask-it contract concluded under the Sixth Framework Programme - Eligible costs - Debit note issued by the Commission for the recovery of amounts advanced - Reliability of the time records - Conflict of interests - Subcontracting)
(2022/C 95/28)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Katsimerou, T. Adamopoulos and J. Estrada de Solà, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 272 TFEU seeking a declaration, first, that the request made to the applicant by the Commission in debit note No 3241615292 of 29 November 2016 to reimburse to it the sum of EUR 211 185,95 of the payment received for a study on a research project called Ask-it is, in the amount of EUR 89 126,11, unfounded, and, second, that the sum in dispute corresponds to eligible costs which the applicant is not required to reimburse.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 151, 15.5.2017.
Case T-795/19: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — HB v Commission (Public service contracts — Provision of technical assistance services to the High Judicial Council — Decision to reduce the amount of the contract and to recover the amounts already paid — Action for annulment and for damages — Act forming part of a purely contractual framework from which it is inseparable — No arbitration clause — Inadmissibility — No heads of damage that are separable from the contract)
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: arbitration clause, award of contract, claim, damages, interest, reduced price, reimbursement of aid, services contract








C_2022095EN.01002601.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/26






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — HB v Commission
(Case T-795/19) (1)

(Public service contracts - Provision of technical assistance services to the High Judicial Council - Decision to reduce the amount of the contract and to recover the amounts already paid - Action for annulment and for damages - Act forming part of a purely contractual framework from which it is inseparable - No arbitration clause - Inadmissibility - No heads of damage that are separable from the contract)
(2022/C 95/34)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: HB (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz, J. Estrada de Solà and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Re:







(i)


Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 7319 final of 15 October 2019 to reduce the amounts due under contract CARDS/2008/166-429 and to recover the amounts unduly paid and (ii) application under the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU seeking, first of all, reimbursement of any amounts recovered by the Commission on the basis of that decision and payment of the last invoice issued, together with late-payment interest; next, release of the bank guarantee and compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant on account of its late release; and lastly, symbolic compensation for the non-material harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.





Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action as inadmissible, in so far as it seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 7319 final of 15 October 2019 to reduce the amounts due under contract CARDS/2008/166-429 and to recover the amounts unduly paid;










2.


Dismisses the action as unfounded, in so far as it seeks to establish non-contractual liability on the part of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.
Case C-586/20 P: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 December 2021 — P. Krücken Organic GmbH v European Commission (Appeal — Law governing the institutions — Action for damages — Conditions governing the non-contractual liability of the European Union — Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 — Organic production and labelling of organic products — Article 33(3) — Concept of ‘appropriate supervision’ — Regulation (EC) No 1235/2008 — Arrangements for imports of organic products from third countries — Private control body for the purpose of equivalence — Attribution of that body’s conduct to the European Commission)
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, civil liability proceedings, damages, import (EU), labelling, organic certification, organic product, originating product, sesame








C_2022084EN.01002001.xml










21.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 84/20






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 December 2021 — P. Krücken Organic GmbH v European Commission
(Case C-586/20 P) (1)

(Appeal - Law governing the institutions - Action for damages - Conditions governing the non-contractual liability of the European Union - Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 - Organic production and labelling of organic products - Article 33(3) - Concept of ‘appropriate supervision’ - Regulation (EC) No 1235/2008 - Arrangements for imports of organic products from third countries - Private control body for the purpose of equivalence - Attribution of that body’s conduct to the European Commission)
(2022/C 84/24)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: P. Krücken Organic GmbH (represented by: H. Schmidt, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, B. Hofstötter and B. Eggers, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders P. Krücken Organic GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Case T-699/20: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN — Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle or other bird of prey — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Phonetic similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, optical industry, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2022095EN.01003201.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/32






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN)
(Case T-699/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN - Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle or other bird of prey - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Phonetic similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2022/C 95/43)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Fashion Energy Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: T. Müller and F. Togo, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Retail Royalty Co. (Las Vegas, Nevada, United States) (represented by: J. Bogatz and Y. Stone, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 September 2020 (Case R 426/2020-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Retail Royalty and Fashion Energy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Fashion Energy Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 28, 25.1.2021.
Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products on 20 December 2021 (Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1.)) 2021/C 516/01
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, coronavirus disease, drug surveillance, market approval, marketing standard, vaccine








C_2021516EN.01000101.xml










21.12.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 516/1






Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products on 20 December 2021


(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1))

(2021/C 516/01)






—



Issuing of a marketing authorisation (Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council): Accepted













Date of the decision


Name of the medicinal product


INN (International Non-Proprietary Name)


Holder of the marketing authorisation


Number of the entry in the Community Register


Pharmaceutical form


ATC code (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Code)


Date of notification




20.12.2021


Nuvaxovid


COVID-19 Vaccine (recombinant, adjuvanted)







Novavax CZ, a.s.




Bohumil 138, 281 63 Jevany, Česká republika






EU/1/21/1618


dispersion for injection


J07BX03


20.12.2021








Anyone wishing to consult the public assessment report on the medicinal products in question and the decisions relating thereto is invited to contact:





European Medicines Agency




Domenico Scarlattilaan 6




1083 HS Amsterdam




NETHERLANDS






(1)  OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1.
Case T-792/21: Action brought on 21 December 2021 — ClientEarth v Commission
Date: 2021-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, corporate governance, legislative initiative








C_2022084EN.01004401.xml










21.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 84/44






Action brought on 21 December 2021 — ClientEarth v Commission
(Case T-792/21)
(2022/C 84/62)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ClientEarth AISBL (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: F. Logue, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the implied decision of the European Commission dated 12 October 2021 in case GESTDEM No 2021/4394 refusing the applicant’s request for access to documents; (1)











—


order the Commission to pay the applicant’s costs pursuant to Articles 133 and 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, including the costs of any intervening parties.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging that the Commission failed to state reasons in breach of Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001, (2) Article 41(2)(c), of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 296, paragraph 2, TFEU.


(1)  Editorial note: the documents in question concern the EU’s legislative initiative regarding sustainable corporate governance.

(2)  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).