do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-899/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 January 2022 — Romania v European Commission, Hungary (Appeal — Law governing the institutions — Citizens’ initiative — Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 — Article 4(2)(b) — Registration of a proposed citizens’ initiative — Condition requiring that that proposed citizens’ initiative does not manifestly fall outside the framework of the European Commission’s powers to submit a proposal for a legal act for the purpose of implementing the Treaties — Decision (EU) 2017/652 — Citizens’ initiative ‘Minority SafePack — one million signatures for diversity in Europe’ — Registration in part — Article 5(2) TEU — Principle of conferral — Article 296 TFEU — Obligation to state reasons — Audi alteram partem rule)
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European citizens' initiative, cultural pluralism, legislative power, linguistic group, national minority, powers of the institutions (EU), rights of minorities








C_2022119EN.01000501.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/5






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 20 January 2022 — Romania v European Commission, Hungary
(Case C-899/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Law governing the institutions - Citizens’ initiative - Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 - Article 4(2)(b) - Registration of a proposed citizens’ initiative - Condition requiring that that proposed citizens’ initiative does not manifestly fall outside the framework of the European Commission’s powers to submit a proposal for a legal act for the purpose of implementing the Treaties - Decision (EU) 2017/652 - Citizens’ initiative ‘Minority SafePack — one million signatures for diversity in Europe’ - Registration in part - Article 5(2) TEU - Principle of conferral - Article 296 TFEU - Obligation to state reasons - Audi alteram partem rule)
(2022/C 119/06)
Language of the case: Romanian

Parties


Appellant: Romania (represented by: E. Gane, L. Liţu, M. Chicu and L. E. Baţagoi, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: initially by I. Martínez del Peral, H. Stancu and H. Krämer, subsequently by I. Martínez del Peral and H. Stancu, acting as Agents, Hungary (represented by: M. Z. Fehér and K. Szíjjártó, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Romania to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders Hungary to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.
Case C-45/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 20 January 2022 — HK v Service fédéral des Pensions (SFP)
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cumulative pension entitlement, overlapping of income, social security legislation, social-security harmonisation, survivor's benefit








C_2022191EN.01001001.xml










10.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/10






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 20 January 2022 — HK v Service fédéral des Pensions (SFP)
(Case C-45/22)
(2022/C 191/13)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: HK

Defendant: Service fédéral des Pensions (SFP)

Questions referred







—


Must the rule laid down in Article 55(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) that the competent institutions are to divide the amounts of the benefit or benefits or other income, as they have been taken into account, by the number of benefits subject to the said rules be interpreted as meaning that the income as such taken into account when applying the rule to prevent overlapping must be divided by the number of survivors’ pensions impacted by the rules against overlapping?










—


On the contrary, must the rule laid down in Article 55(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 that the competent institutions are to divide the amounts of the benefit or benefits or other income, as they have been taken into account, by the number of benefits subject to the said rules be interpreted as meaning that it is not the income as such taken into account when applying the rule to prevent overlapping, but rather it is the portion of the income which exceeds a ceiling in respect of overlapping, as, for example, laid down by the national rule at issue, that must be divided by the number of survivors’ pensions impacted by the rules against overlapping?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1).
Case T-488/21: Order of the General Court of 20 January 2022 — Tralux and Others v Parliament
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Luxembourg, award of contract, building, invitation to tender, tendering








C_2022119EN.01005903.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/59






Order of the General Court of 20 January 2022 — Tralux and Others v Parliament
(Case T-488/21) (1)

(2022/C 119/86)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
European Parliament decision of 20 January 2022 on the nomination of Jorg Kristijan Petrovič as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0408/2021 — 2021/0805(NLE))
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, European Parliament
Subjects: appointment of members, member of the Court of Auditors (EU)








C_2022336EN.01004001.xml










2.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 336/40






P9_TA(2022)0005
Nomination of a member of the Court of Auditors — Jorg Kristijan Petrovič
European Parliament decision of 20 January 2022 on the nomination of Jorg Kristijan Petrovič as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0408/2021 — 2021/0805(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2022/C 336/09)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0408/2021),










—


having regard to Rule 129 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0005/2022),










A.


whereas, by letter of 5 November 2021, the Council consulted Parliament on the nomination of Jorg Kristijan Petrovič as a Member of the Court of Auditors;










B.


whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control then proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










C.


whereas the committee subsequently held a hearing with the nominee on 10 January 2022, at which the nominee made an opening statement and then answered questions put by the members of the committee;












1.


Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Jorg Kristijan Petrovič as a Member of the Court of Auditors;












2.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.
Case C-165/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin — Germany) — ET acting as insolvency administrator of Air Berlin PLC & Co. Luftverkehrs KG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Directive 2003/87/EC — Article 3e — Inclusion of aviation activities — Directive 2008/101/EC — Allocation and issue of allowances free of charge to aircraft operators — Cessation, by such an operator, of its activities due to insolvency — Decision of the competent national authority refusing to issue allowances to the insolvency administrator of the company in liquidation)
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, EU emission allowance, aircraft, airline, carrier, financial solvency, greenhouse gas, liquidation, tradeable emission permit








C_2022119EN.01000702.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/7






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 20 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin — Germany) — ET acting as insolvency administrator of Air Berlin PLC & Co. Luftverkehrs KG v Bundesrepublik Deutschland
(Case C-165/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Directive 2003/87/EC - Article 3e - Inclusion of aviation activities - Directive 2008/101/EC - Allocation and issue of allowances free of charge to aircraft operators - Cessation, by such an operator, of its activities due to insolvency - Decision of the competent national authority refusing to issue allowances to the insolvency administrator of the company in liquidation)
(2022/C 119/10)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ET acting as insolvency administrator of Air Berlin PLC & Co. Luftverkehrs KG

Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3e of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2017/2392 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2017, must be interpreted as meaning that the number of greenhouse gas emission allowances allocated free of charge to an aircraft operator must, in the event of cessation of that operator’s aviation activities during the period of greenhouse gas emission allowance trading in question, be reduced in proportion to the part of that period during which those activities are no longer carried out.


(1)  OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10585 – APMH INVEST / UNILABS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 49/02
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, medical diagnosis, merger control, pharmaceutical industry, provision of services








C_2022049EN.01000201.xml










31.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 49/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10585 – APMH INVEST / UNILABS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 49/02)
On 20 January 2022, 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 32022M10585. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Dangerous substances – List of authorisation decisions taken by the EEA EFTA States in accordance with Article 44(5) of Regulation (EU) 528/2012 in the first half of 2021 2022/C 29/05
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Standing Committee of the EFTA States
Subjects: EFTA countries, European Economic Area, biocide, chemical product, dangerous substance, free movement of goods, market approval, marketing standard








C_2022029EN.01003001.xml










20.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 29/30






Dangerous substances – List of authorisation decisions taken by the EEA EFTA States in accordance with Article 44(5) of Regulation (EU) 528/2012 in the first half of 2021
(2022/C 29/05)

Subcommittee I on the free movement of goods


To be noted by the EEA Joint Committee

With reference to EEA Joint Committee Decision No 225/2013 of 13 December 2013, the EEA Joint Committee is invited to note the following lists concerning authorisation decisions adopted on the basis of Article 44(5) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 for the period 1 January – 30 June 2021, at their meeting on 24 September 2021.




ANNEX

List of authorisation decisions

The following authorisation decisions in accordance with Article 44(5) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012) have been taken in the EEA EFTA States during the period 1 January – 30 June 2021:








Biocidal Product Name


Union authorisation decisions under Article 44(5) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012


Country


Date of decision




Aero-Sense Aircraft Insecticide ASD


32021R0368


Iceland


23.4.2021




Aero-Sense Aircraft Insecticide ASD


32021R0368


Liechtenstein


15.4.2021




Aero-Sense Aircraft Insecticide ASD


32021R0368


Norway


22.4.2021




Contec Hydrogen Peroxide


32020D2124


Norway


15.4.2021




DEC-AHOL® Product Family


32021R0552


Iceland


25.6.2021




DEC-AHOL® Product Family


32021R0552


Liechtenstein


17.6.2021




DEC-AHOL® Product Family


32021R0552


Norway


15.6.2021




Iodine Teat Dip Products


32020R0202


Iceland


19.5.2021




Iodine Teat Dip Products


32020R0202


Liechtenstein


18.5.2021




Iodine Teat Dip Products


32020R0202


Norway


20.5.2021




Perform-IPA


32020R1991


Iceland


23.4.2021




Perform-IPA


32020R1991


Liechtenstein


15.4.2021




Perform-IPA


32020R1991


Norway


13.4.2021




PeridoxRTU


32020R1425


Iceland


19.4.2021




PeridoxRTU


32020R1425


Liechtenstein


29.3.2021




PeridoxRTU


32020R1425


Norway


13.4.2021
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1832 of 12 October 2021 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (Official Journal of the European Union L 385 of 29 October 2021)
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, Taric, customs regulations, greenhouse gas, information technology industry, iron and steel product, pharmaceutical product, specification of tariff heading, tobacco, wood product








L_2022013EN.01007501.xml










20.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 13/75







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1832 of 12 October 2021 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 385 of 29 October 2021
)


On page 694, under point 6, after subpoints (a), (b) and (c), the following paragraph is inserted:


                     ‘This heading does not include equipment more specifically classified elsewhere in the nomenclature.’
Case T-38/22: Action brought on 20 January 2022 — Romedor Pharma v EUIPO — Perfect Care Distribution (CERVIRON Perfect Care)
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022138EN.01002501.xml










28.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/25






Action brought on 20 January 2022 — Romedor Pharma v EUIPO — Perfect Care Distribution (CERVIRON Perfect Care)
(Case T-38/22)
(2022/C 138/29)
Language in which the application was lodged: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Romedor Pharma SRL (Focşani, Romania) (represented by: E. Dicu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Perfect Care Distribution (Bucharest, Romania)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark CERVIRON PERFECT CARE — EU trade mark No 18 064 805

Procedure before EUIPO: proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 November 2021 in Case R 521/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


uphold the action as formulated and reasoned;










—


annul the contested decision and, consequently, uphold the application for a declaration of invalidity in respect of EU trade mark No 18 064 805.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(c), in conjunction with Article 8(4), of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Corrigendum to INFORMATION NOTICE – PUBLIC CONSULTATION – Geographical Indications from El Salvador to be protected as Geographical Indications in the European Union (Official Journal of the European Union OJ C 522 of 28 December 2021) 2022/C 30/02
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: El Salvador, association agreement (EU), bread, coffee, consumer information, crustacean, designation of origin, fresh fruit, fresh vegetable, public consultation, spirits








C_2022030EN.01000201.xml










20.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/2






Corrigendum to INFORMATION NOTICE – PUBLIC CONSULTATION – Geographical Indications from El Salvador to be protected as Geographical Indications in the European Union

(Official Journal of the European Union 
OJ C 522 of 28 December 2021
)

(2022/C 30/02)
On page 20, fourth paragraph, second sentence:
for:

‘Statements of opposition should be sent to the following e-mail address: AGRI The Americas@ec.europa.eu’,

read:

‘Statements of opposition should be sent to the following email address: AGRI-The-Americas@ec.europa.eu’.
Case C-891/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 January 2022 — European Commission v Hubei Xinyegang Special Tube Co. Ltd, ArcelorMittal Tubular Products Roman SA, Válcovny trub Chomutov a.s., Vallourec Deutschland GmbH (Appeal — Dumping — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/804 — Imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes originating in China — Definitive anti-dumping duty — Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 — Article 3(2), (3) and (6), and Article 17 — Determination of injury — Examination of the effect of dumped imports on the prices of like products sold on the EU market — Analysis of price undercutting — Application of the product control number (PCN) method — Obligation of the European Commission to take into account the different market segments relating to the product under consideration and all sales of like products by the sampled EU producers)
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, EU market, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), iron, market prices, originating product, piping, sale, steel, tube








C_2022119EN.01000401.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/4






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 January 2022 — European Commission v Hubei Xinyegang Special Tube Co. Ltd, ArcelorMittal Tubular Products Roman SA, Válcovny trub Chomutov a.s., Vallourec Deutschland GmbH
(Case C-891/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Dumping - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/804 - Imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes originating in China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 - Article 3(2), (3) and (6), and Article 17 - Determination of injury - Examination of the effect of dumped imports on the prices of like products sold on the EU market - Analysis of price undercutting - Application of the product control number (PCN) method - Obligation of the European Commission to take into account the different market segments relating to the product under consideration and all sales of like products by the sampled EU producers)
(2022/C 119/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented initially by T. Maxian Rusche and N. Kuplewatzky, and subsequently by T. Maxian Rusche and A. Demeneix and, finally, by T. Maxian Rusche and by K. Blanck, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Hubei Xinyegang Special Tube Co. Ltd (represented by E. Vermulst and J. Cornelis, advocaten), ArcelorMittal Tubular Products Roman SA, Válcovny trub Chomutov a.s., Vallourec Deutschland GmbH (represented by G. Berrisch, Rechtsanwalt)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 24 September 2019, Hubei Xinyegang Special Tube v Commission (T-500/17, not published, EU:T:2019:691);










2.


Refers the case back to the General Court;










3.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.
Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates applicable as from 1 February 2022 (Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1.)) 2022/C 29/02
Date: 2022-01-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, State aid, interest, reimbursement of aid








C_2022029EN.01000301.xml










20.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 29/3






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


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

(2022/C 29/02)
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 504, 14.12.2021, p. 47.


































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




1.2.2022


…


-0,49 


-0,49 


0,00 


-0,49 



3,29 



-0,49 



-0,03 



-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


0,26 



3,17 



-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 


-0,49 



2,04 



-0,49 



2,74 




-0,05 



-0,49 


-0,49 



0,66 





1.1.2022


31.1.2022



-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.