do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-520/19: Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — Heitec v EUIPO — Hetec Datensysteme (HEITEC) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark HEITEC — No account taken of evidence submitted before the Cancellation Division and before the Board of Appeal — Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — No genuine use of the trade mark — Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Rule 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 19(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625))
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, automation, consultancy, recording equipment, registered trade mark, teaching materials, trade-mark law, traineeship, user guide








C_2022148EN.01002102.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/21






Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — Heitec v EUIPO — Hetec Datensysteme (HEITEC)
(Case T-520/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark HEITEC - No account taken of evidence submitted before the Cancellation Division and before the Board of Appeal - Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No genuine use of the trade mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Rule 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 19(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625))
(2022/C 148/28)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Heitec AG (Erlangue, Germany) (represented by: G. Wagner, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Hetec Datensysteme GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Kockläuner and O. Nilgen, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 April 2019 (Case R 1171/2018-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Hetec Datensysteme and Heitec.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Heitec AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.
Case C-87/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Korneuburg (Austria) lodged on 9 February 2022 — TT v AK
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: custody, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, residence








C_2022213EN.01002501.xml










30.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/25






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Korneuburg (Austria) lodged on 9 February 2022 — TT v AK
(Case C-87/22)
(2022/C 213/34)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Korneuburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: TT

Respondent: AK

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, (1) be interpreted as meaning that the courts of a Member State having jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter, if they consider that a court of another Member State, with which the child has a particular connection, would be better placed to hear the case, or a specific part thereof, may request such a court to assume jurisdiction even in the case where that other Member State has become the place of habitual residence of the child following wrongful removal?










2.


If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative:
Must Article 15 of Regulation No 2201/2003 be interpreted as meaning that the criteria for the transfer of jurisdiction that are set out in that article are regulated exhaustively, without the need to consider further criteria in the light of proceedings initiated under Article 8(f) of the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction?






(1)  OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1.
Case T-740/18: Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — Taminco and Arysta LifeScience Great Britain v Commission (Plant protection products — Active substance thiram — Non-renewal of approval — Regulation No 1107/2009 and Implementing Regulation No 844/2012 — Rights of the defence — Procedural irregularity — Manifest error of assessment — Competence of EFSA — Proportionality — Precautionary principle — Equal treatment)
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: equal treatment, market approval, plant health product, precautionary principle, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, seed








C_2022128EN.01001601.xml










21.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/16






Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — Taminco and Arysta LifeScience Great Britain v Commission
(Case T-740/18) (1)

(Plant protection products - Active substance thiram - Non-renewal of approval - Regulation No 1107/2009 and Implementing Regulation No 844/2012 - Rights of the defence - Procedural irregularity - Manifest error of assessment - Competence of EFSA - Proportionality - Precautionary principle - Equal treatment)
(2022/C 128/21)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Taminco BVBA (Ghent, Belgium), Arysta LifeScience Great Britain Ltd (Edinburgh, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Mereu and M. Grunchard, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Koleva, acting as Agent)

Re:

APPLICATION under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1500 of 9 October 2018 concerning the non-renewal of approval of the active substance thiram, and prohibiting the use and sale of seeds treated with plant protection products containing thiram, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2018 L 254, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Taminco BVBA and Arysta LifeScience Great Britain Ltd to bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the context of the present action;










3.


Orders Taminco to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Commission in the context of the proceedings for interim measures.






(1)  OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10582 - GAMALIFE / GOING CONCERN OF ZURICH INVESTMENTS LIFE) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 68/05
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Portugal, economic concentration, insurance company, insurance contract, life assurance, merger control








C_2022068EN.01000801.xml










9.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 68/8






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10582 - GAMALIFE / GOING CONCERN OF ZURICH INVESTMENTS LIFE)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 68/05)

1.   
On 1 February 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:






—


GamaLife – Companhia de Seguros de Vida, S.A. (‘GamaLife’, Portugal),










—


A business unit of Zurich Investments Life S.p.A. (the ‘Target’, Italy).




Gamalife will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the Target.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned:






—


Gamalife is a life insurance undertaking, primarily active in Portugal, wholly-owned by investment funds advised by Apax Partners LLP (‘AP’, UK).










—


The Target is a mainly closed portfolio of life insurance contracts, together with the relevant assets, operations, contracts, employees, rights, liabilities and obligations.






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.10582 - GAMALIFE / GOING CONCERN OF ZURICH INVESTMENTS LIFE
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.
Case T-868/16: Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — QI and Others v Commission and ECB (Non-contractual liability — Economic and monetary policy — Restructuring of Greek public debt — Bond exchange agreement for the sole benefit of the Eurosystem central banks — Private sector involvement — Collective action clauses — Private creditors — Official sector creditors — Attributability — Sufficiently serious infringement of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals — Article 63(1) TFEU — Articles 120 to 127 and Article 352(1) TFEU — Right to property — Equal treatment)
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Eurosystem, Greece, aid for restructuring, central bank, claim, equal treatment, liability, ownership, private sector, public debt, securities








C_2022128EN.01001401.xml










21.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 128/14






Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — QI and Others v Commission and ECB
(Case T-868/16) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Economic and monetary policy - Restructuring of Greek public debt - Bond exchange agreement for the sole benefit of the Eurosystem central banks - Private sector involvement - Collective action clauses - Private creditors - Official sector creditors - Attributability - Sufficiently serious infringement of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Article 63(1) TFEU - Articles 120 to 127 and Article 352(1) TFEU - Right to property - Equal treatment)
(2022/C 128/18)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: QI and the 15 other applicants whose names are set out in the annex to the judgment (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: J.-P. Keppenne, L. Flynn and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents) and European Central Bank (represented by: K. Laurinavičius and M. Szablewska, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendants: European Council and Council of the European Union (represented by: K. Michoel, E. Chatziioakeimidou and J. Bauerschmidt, acting as Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants following the implementation of a mandatory exchange of State bonds in the context of the restructuring of Greek public debt in 2012 through the involvement of private investors by means of the application of collective action clauses, due to the conduct and actions of, in particular, the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the ECB.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders QI and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to pay, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB);










3.


Orders the European Council and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 30, 30.1.2017.
Decision of the General Court of 9 February 2022 on judicial vacations
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: holiday, operation of the Institutions, public holiday




C_2022138EN.01000301.xml










28.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/3






DECISION OF THE GENERAL COURT
of 9 February 2022
on judicial vacations
(2022/C 138/03)
THE GENERAL COURT
Having regard to Article 41(2) of the Rules of Procedure,
HAS DECIDED:


Article 1

For the judicial year beginning on 1 September 2022, the dates of the judicial vacations within the meaning of Article 41(2) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure are as follows:






—


Christmas 2022: from Monday 19 December 2022 to Sunday 8 January 2023 inclusive;










—


Easter 2023: from Monday 3 April 2023 to Sunday 16 April 2023 inclusive;










—


Summer 2023: from Sunday 16 July 2023 to Thursday 31 August 2023 inclusive.







Article 2

This decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.


Luxembourg, 8 March 2022.


Registrar

E. COULON



President

M. VAN DER WOUDE
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10595 – CERBERUS / HBCE (FRENCH RETAIL BANKING)) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 68/06
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: banking, consultancy, economic concentration, financial services, insurance, investment company, long-term financing, merger control, securities, short-term financing








C_2022068EN.01001001.xml










9.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 68/10






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10595 – CERBERUS / HBCE (FRENCH RETAIL BANKING))
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 68/06)

1.   
On 31 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:






—


Cerberus Capital Management L.P. (‘Cerberus’, US), and










—


HSBC Continental Europe’s French retail banking business (‘HBCE’s French Retail Banking Business’, France), part of HSBC Group controlled by HSBC Holdings plc.




Cerberus will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of HBCE’s French Retail Banking Business.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned:






—


Cerberus is a long-term investment company in all sort of securities and assets, including but not limited to, complementary credit, private equity, real estate platforms and middle market lending.










—


HBCE’s French Retail Banking Business offers to its retail customers: day-to-day banking and financial services; solutions for their short and long terms financing needs; insurance solutions and financial, insurance and investment advice and asset management services.






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.10595 – CERBERUS / HBCE (FRENCH RETAIL BANKING)
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.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 8 February 2022 2022/C 68/03
Date: 2022-02-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022068EN.01000501.xml










9.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 68/5






Euro exchange rates (1)

8 February 2022
(2022/C 68/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1408 




JPY


Japanese yen


131,68 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4437 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84363 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4433 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0545 




ISK


Iceland króna


142,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,0758 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,259 




HUF


Hungarian forint


353,09 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5312 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9450 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,5558 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6025 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4505 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8923 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7196 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5349 




KRW


South Korean won


1 367,88 




ZAR


South African rand


17,6380 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2636 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5215 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 418,40 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7740 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,715 




RUB


Russian rouble


85,7797 




THB


Thai baht


37,606 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,0209 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,5601 




INR


Indian rupee


85,2545 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.