do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-50/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Paris (France) lodged on 25 January 2022 — SOGEFINANCEMENT v RW, UV
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, consumer credit, consumer protection, principle of legal certainty, termination of a contract, unfair terms of contract








C_2022191EN.01001201.xml










10.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Paris (France) lodged on 25 January 2022 — SOGEFINANCEMENT v RW, UV
(Case C-50/22)
(2022/C 191/16)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Paris

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: SOGEFINANCEMENT

Defendants: RW, UV

Questions referred







1.


Does the principle that penalties must be effective, deriving from Article 23 of Directive 2008/48/EC, (1) in the light of the principles of legal certainty and of States’ procedural autonomy, preclude a situation whereby a court may not raise of its own motion a national legal provision, resulting from Article 14 of that directive and penalised under national law by the nullity of the agreement, beyond the five-year limitation period within which the consumer may seek the annulment of the credit agreement by bringing legal proceedings or by raising an objection?










2.


Does the principle that penalties must be effective, deriving from Article 23 of Directive 2008/48/EC, in the light of the principles of legal certainty and of States’ procedural autonomy and the principle that the subject matter of an action is delimited by the parties, preclude a situation whereby a court may not declare a credit agreement null and void after raising of its own motion a provision of national law, resulting from Article 14 of that directive, where the consumer has not applied for or at least acquiesced in such annulment?






(1)  Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66).
Case T-46/22: Action brought on 25 January 2022 — Esedra v Parliament
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, Brussels region, European Parliament, award of contract, child care, damages, nursery school, tendering








C_2022109EN.01003402.xml










7.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/34






Action brought on 25 January 2022 — Esedra v Parliament
(Case T-46/22)
(2022/C 109/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Esedra (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Vastmans, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the action for annulment admissible and well founded;
consequently;






—


annul the decision of the European Parliament to award the contract at issue to SAS PEOPLE & BABY and to reject the tender from SRL ESEDRA;










—


compensate SRL ESEDRA for the damage sustained as a result of that illegal decision;














—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action against the decision of the European Parliament of 26 November 2021, rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant under tender procedure No PE PERS 2021 027 for the full management of the early childhood care facility of the European Parliament at Rue Wayenberg in Brussels, and awarding the contract to SAS People & Baby, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, infringement of Article 170 TFEU, infringement of Article 16.1. of the tender specifications, infringement of general principles of law and, more specifically, of the principle of detailed and exhaustive examination, the principle that formal reasons should be stated and the principle of patere legem quam ipse fecisti, and manifest error of assessment.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 3.13. of the tender specifications, infringement of the Decree of 21 February 2019 aimed at reinforcing the quality and accessibility of early childhood care in the French Community and of the Decree of 2 May 2019 of the Government of the French Community laying down the system of authorisation and subsidies for crèches, childcare services and independent (co-)carers of children and/or of the Decree of 22 November 2013 of the Flemish Government laying down the approval conditions and the quality policy for family and group care of babies and toddlers, infringement of general principles of law and, more specifically, of the principles of detailed and exhaustive examination and patere legem quam ipse fecisti, and a manifest error of assessment.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10472 – DEUTSCHE POST DHL GROUP / JF HILLEBRAND GROUP) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 54/02
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Germany, carriage for hire or reward, carriage of goods, delivery, economic concentration, electronic commerce, logistics, merger control, parent company, postal service








C_2022054EN.01000201.xml










1.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 54/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10472 – DEUTSCHE POST DHL GROUP / JF HILLEBRAND GROUP)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 54/02)
On 25 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 32022M10472. 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.) 24 January 2022 2022/C 38/01
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022038EN.01000101.xml










25.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

24 January 2022
(2022/C 38/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1304 




JPY


Japanese yen


128,62 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4431 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83803 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5038 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0308 




ISK


Iceland króna


145,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1638 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,528 




HUF


Hungarian forint


359,84 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5572 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9453 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,1621 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5866 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4269 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8003 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6901 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5216 




KRW


South Korean won


1 352,41 




ZAR


South African rand


17,2509 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1533 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5290 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 213,69 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7352 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,045 




RUB


Russian rouble


88,6490 




THB


Thai baht


37,382 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,1901 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,2566 




INR


Indian rupee


84,3495 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10526 – CHEVRON / NESTE BASE OIL) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 38 I/03
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, fuel, gas industry, lubricants, merger control, oil industry, petrochemicals








CI2022038EN.01000501.xml










25.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 38/5






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10526 – CHEVRON / NESTE BASE OIL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 38 I/03)

1.   
On 18 January 2022, 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:






—


Chevron Global Energy Inc. (‘Chevron’, USA), controlled by Chevron










—


Corporation (USA),










—


Neste Base Oil Finland Oy (‘Neste Base Oil’, Finland), controlled by Neste Oyj (Finland).




Chevron will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Neste Base Oil.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned:






—


Chevron: active in the production of crude oil and natural gas, the manufacturing of transportation fuels, lubricants, petrochemicals and additives,










—


Neste Base Oil: Neste’s base oil business consists of a carve out from Neste Oyj’s Oil Products business segment and consists mainly of the NEXBASE™ brand, associated qualifications and approvals, sales and logistics contracts as well as an offtake agreement for the production and delivery of Group III and Group II base oils. It does not include any production facilities.






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.10526 – CHEVRON / NESTE BASE OIL
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’).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10546 – ICG / CEIT) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 72/01
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, financial services, investment company, merger control, telecommunications, transport infrastructure








C_2022072EN.01000101.xml










14.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10546 – ICG / CEIT)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 72/01)
On 25 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 32022M10546. 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.10548 – TELEKOM DEUTSCHLAND / IFM INVESTORS / JV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 49/05
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Germany, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, mobile communication, telecommunications industry, transmission network








C_2022049EN.01000501.xml










31.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 49/5






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10548 – TELEKOM DEUTSCHLAND / IFM INVESTORS / JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 49/05)
On 25 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 32022M10548. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-51/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Pesti Központi Kerületi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 25 January 2022 — PannonHitel Pénzügyi Zrt. v WizzAir Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, indemnification, package travel, trade intermediary, traveller








C_2022165EN.01002801.xml










19.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/28






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Pesti Központi Kerületi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 25 January 2022 — PannonHitel Pénzügyi Zrt. v WizzAir Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)
(Case C-51/22)
(2022/C 165/36)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Pesti Központi Kerületi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: PannonHitel Pénzügyi Zrt.

Defendant: WizzAir Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)

Question referred

Must Article 5(1)(a), the first indent of Article 8(1)(a) and Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, (1) be interpreted as meaning that a passenger may exercise his or her right to reimbursement of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought directly against the air carrier, even where the passenger has booked the ticket with the help of a third party acting as an intermediary, to whom the passenger paid the ticket price, and it was the intermediary who purchased the ticket from the air carrier and who paid [the carrier] the ticket price, and there is no indication that the intermediary was acting as the authorised agent of the air carrier or that it was a tour operator?


(1)  OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.
Case C-552/21: Order of the President of the Court of 25 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden — Germany) — FT v Land Hessen, intervening party: SCHUFA Holding AG
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: credit rating, data protection, database, judicial review, personal data, petition, supervisory body








C_2022222EN.01002504.xml










7.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/25






Order of the President of the Court of 25 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Wiesbaden — Germany) — FT v Land Hessen, intervening party: SCHUFA Holding AG
(Case C-552/21) (1)

(2022/C 222/40)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Case C-181/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud — Czech Republic) — VYSOČINA WIND a.s. v Česká republika — Ministerstvo životního prostředí (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Directive 2012/19/EU — Waste electrical and electronic equipment — Obligation to finance the costs relating to the management of waste from photovoltaic panels — Retroactive effect — Principle of legal certainty — Incorrect transposition of a directive — Liability of the Member State)
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electronic waste, financing method, liability of the State, national implementing measure, photovoltaic cell, principle of legal certainty, producer's liability, retroactivity of a law, waste disposal, waste recycling








C_2022119EN.01000901.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/9






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 January 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud — Czech Republic) — VYSOČINA WIND a.s. v Česká republika — Ministerstvo životního prostředí
(Case C-181/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Environment - Directive 2012/19/EU - Waste electrical and electronic equipment - Obligation to finance the costs relating to the management of waste from photovoltaic panels - Retroactive effect - Principle of legal certainty - Incorrect transposition of a directive - Liability of the Member State)
(2022/C 119/12)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud České republiky

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: VYSOČINA WIND a.s.

Defendant: Česká republika — Ministerstvo životního prostředí

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 13(1) of Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) is invalid in so far as it imposes on producers the obligation to finance the costs relating to the management of waste from photovoltaic panels placed on the market between 13 August 2005 and 13 August 2012.
Article 13(1) of Directive 2012/19 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which imposes on users of photovoltaic panels, and not on producers of those panels, the obligation to finance the costs relating to the management of waste from such panels placed on the market from 13 August 2012, the date on which that directive entered into force.










2.


EU law must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that a Member State adopted legislation contrary to an EU directive prior to the adoption of that directive does not constitute, in itself, a breach of EU law, since the achievement of the result prescribed by the directive cannot be regarded as seriously compromised before the directive forms part of the EU legal order.






(1)  OJ C 222, 6.7.2020.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10596 – OTPP / KKR / GREENCOLLAR) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 38 I/02
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: capital market, economic concentration, environmental industry, insurance, investment company, merger control, pension scheme, property development, teacher








CI2022038EN.01000301.xml










25.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 38/3






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10596 – OTPP / KKR / GREENCOLLAR)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 38 I/02)

1.   
On 14 January 2022, 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:






—


Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board (‘OTPP’, Canada),










—


KKR & Co. Inc. (‘KKR & Co’, and together wih its affiliates, ‘KKR’, United States),










—


Green Climate Co Pty Ltd (‘GreenCollar’, Australia).




OTPP and KKR acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and Article 3(4) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of GreenCollar.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


OTPP is a corporation without share capital incorporated under the Teachers’ Pension Act (Ontario). OTPP is concerned with the administration of pension benefits and the investment of pension plan assets on behalf of approximately 331 000 active and retired teachers in the Canadian province of Ontario,










—


KKR is a global investment firm that offers alternative asset management and capital markets and insurance solutions,










—


GreenCollar is an environmental platform and project developer in Australia (specialising in nature based projects).






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.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


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.10596 – OTPP / KKR / GREENCOLLAR
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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10563 – ENGIE SPAIN / PREDICA / EOLIA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 63/02
Date: 2022-01-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Spain, economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, energy production, gas industry, insurance, merger control, renewable energy, solar energy, wind energy








C_2022063EN.01000201.xml










7.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10563 – ENGIE SPAIN / PREDICA / EOLIA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 63/02)
On 25 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 32022M10563. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.