do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-94/22: Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Mutondo v Council
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, arms trade, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, right to justice








C_2022148EN.01004401.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/44






Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Mutondo v Council
(Case T-94/22)
(2022/C 148/58)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Kalev Mutondo (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should






—


annul Council decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 (1) in so far as the applicant remains at No 10 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2177 of 9 December 2021 (2) in so far as the applicant remains at No 10 in Annex I to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-90/22, Kande Mupompa v Council.


(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021, amending decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 75).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 3).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10601 – WARBURG PINCUS / OXFORD PROPERTIES / HALE) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 100/02
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, health care, industrial building, investment company, merger control, pension scheme, real estate business, technology








C_2022100EN.01000201.xml










1.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10601 – WARBURG PINCUS / OXFORD PROPERTIES / HALE)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 100/02)
On 21 February 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 32022M10601. 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.) 18 February 2022 2022/C 83/01
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022083EN.01000101.xml










21.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 83/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

18 February 2022
(2022/C 83/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1354 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,59 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4382 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83425 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5796 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0452 




ISK


Iceland króna


140,80 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1465 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,337 




HUF


Hungarian forint


356,37 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5201 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9453 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,4678 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5754 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4424 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8566 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6896 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5255 




KRW


South Korean won


1 356,45 




ZAR


South African rand


17,0858 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1840 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5355 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 304,49 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7528 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,403 




RUB


Russian rouble


86,2815 




THB


Thai baht


36,435 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,8435 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,0270 




INR


Indian rupee


84,6525 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-91/22: Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Ruhorimbere v Council
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, arms trade, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, right to justice








C_2022148EN.01004201.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/42






Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Ruhorimbere v Council
(Case T-91/22)
(2022/C 148/55)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Éric Ruhorimbere (Mbuji-Mayi, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should






—


annul Council decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 (1) in so far as the applicant remains at No 8 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2177 of 9 December 2021 (2) in so far as the applicant remains at No 8 in Annex I to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-90/22, Kande Mupompa v Council.


(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021, amending decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 75).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 3).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/316 of 21 February 2022 approving amendments to the specification for a Protected Designation of Origin or a Protected Geographical Indication (‘Tarragona’ (PDO))
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Catalonia, Spain, designation of origin, fortified wine, labelling, product designation, red wine, rosé wine, sparkling wine, white wine, wine of superior quality








L_2022055EN.01003701.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 55/37








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/316
of 21 February 2022
         
approving amendments to the specification for a Protected Designation of Origin or a Protected Geographical Indication (‘Tarragona’ (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 99 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Commission has examined the application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the Protected Designation of Origin ‘Tarragona’, forwarded by Spain in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(2)


The Commission has published the application for the approval of the amendments to the specification in the Official Journal of the European Union (2), as required by Article 97(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(3)


No statement of objection has been received by the Commission under Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(4)


The amendments to the specification should therefore be approved in accordance with Article 99 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Tarragona’ (PDO) are hereby approved.


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, 21 February 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(2)  
            OJ C 402, 5.10.2021, p. 14.
Case T-635/21: Order of the General Court of 21 February 2022 — Carlings v EUIPO — Margarete Steiff (STUHF) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022171EN.01004001.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/40






Order of the General Court of 21 February 2022 — Carlings v EUIPO — Margarete Steiff (STUHF)
(Case T-635/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 171/54)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Carlings AS (Billingstad, Norway) (represented by: V. Töbelmann and J. Haesemann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Bosse and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Margarete Steiff GmbH (Giengen/Brenz, Germany) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 July 2021 (Case R 2024/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Margarete Steiff and Carlings.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


Carlings AS and Margarete Steiff GmbH shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).






(1)  OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.
Case C-550/21: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma — Italy) — Leonardo SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Regionale del Lazio (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Common system of value added tax — Lack of sufficient information — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Latium, VAT, admissibility, tax law, tax system








C_2022165EN.01002301.xml










19.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/23






Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma — Italy) — Leonardo SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Regionale del Lazio
(Case C-550/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Common system of value added tax - Lack of sufficient information - Manifest inadmissibility)
(2022/C 165/27)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Leonardo SpA

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Regionale del Lazio

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma (Provincial Tax Court, Rome, Italy), by decision of 21 July 2021, is manifestly inadmissible.


(1)  Date lodged: 6.9.2021.
Case T-96/22: Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Kampete v Council
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, arms trade, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, right to justice








C_2022148EN.01004501.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/45






Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Kampete v Council
(Case T-96/22)
(2022/C 148/60)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ilunga Kampete (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should






—


annul Council decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 (1) in so far as the applicant remains at No 1 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2177 of 9 December 2021 (2) in so far as the applicant remains at No 1 in Annex I to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-90/22, Kande Mupompa v Council.


(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021, amending decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 75).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 3).
Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland : customs.
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: Secretariat-General
Subjects: EU customs procedure, Ireland, Northern Ireland, customs union, international trade, tariff exemption

PROTOCOL 
EU CORONAVIRUS 
ON IRELAND/ NORTHERN IRELAND  
RESPONSE
CUSTOMS

21 February 2022

What would the European Commission do to facilitate trade from  
Great Britain to Northern Ireland?

Trusted Traders

Super-reduced dataset

Express lane

To further facilitate trade from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, the European Commission has suggested:

• 

To widen the scope of beneficiaries who are exempt from customs duties when moving goods to Northern Ireland that 
are ‘not at risk’ of entering the EU market;
To implement unique, far-reaching facilitation measures when it comes to customs formalities and processes.

• 
These  solutions  must  be  accompanied  by  adequate  assurances  and  preconditions  to  protect  the  integrity  of  the  EU’s  Single 
Market and Customs Union as detailed in the Commission’s non-paper of 13 October 20211.

‘UK Trader Scheme’ for 
Trusted Traders

More businesses to benefit 
from simplified processes

• 

Expanding the benefits of the UK Trader Scheme: 
• 

To businesses established in Great Britain and not only Northern 
Irish businesses; 
To  more  manufacturing  sectors  in  Northern  Ireland,  in  particular 
covering  SME’s,  including  when  the  goods  are  returned  to  Great 
Britain after processing. 

Data requirements

‘Super-Reduced Dataset’

For Trusted Traders moving ‘goods not at risk’: 
• 

Substantial reduction of customs requirements based on a super-
reduced data set: 
• 

Reducing the requirement for customs data from 80 to 30 key 
data elements; 
Simplifying  the  commodity  code  –  from  10  to  8  digits  –  to 
be provided to describe the goods, meaning the right code is 
easier to determine.

• 

Customs forms

Simplified in number and 
time

For Trusted Traders moving ‘goods not at risk’: 

• 

• 

A  single  simplified  form  per  load.  No  more  supplementary 
declarations needed; OR
A single simplified monthly form with transaction-based customs 
information registered in the trusted traders’ internal records.

1  Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland - Non-Paper - Customs https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/protocol-ireland-and-nothern-ireland-non-paper-customs_en

© European Union, 2022
Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). For 
any use or reproduction of elements that are not owned by the European Union, permission may need to be sought directly from the respective right holders. All images © European 
Union unless otherwise stated. Photo credits: Rory Mackeever @unslpash , K. Mitch Hodge @unsplash , USGS @unsplash

PDF  ISBN:978-92-76-48569-8   DOI:10.2792/91834   KA-07-22-098-EN-N
Case T-92/22: Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Amisi Kumba v Council
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, arms trade, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, right to justice








C_2022148EN.01004202.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/42






Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Amisi Kumba v Council
(Case T-92/22)
(2022/C 148/56)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Gabriel Amisi Kumba (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should






—


annul Council decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 (1) in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in the annex to that decision;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2177 of 9 December 2021 (2) in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in Annex I to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-90/22, Kande Mupompa v Council.


(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021, amending decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 75).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 3).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/318 of 21 February 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Nijolės Šakočienės šakotis’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-02-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Kaunas county, Lithuania, bread, designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2022055EN.01003901.xml










28.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 55/39








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/318
of 21 February 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Nijolės Šakočienės šakotis’ (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)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Lithuania’s application to register the name ‘Nijolės Šakočienės šakotis’ 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 ‘Nijolės Šakočienės šakotis’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Nijolės Šakočienės šakotis’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 2.3 – Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares, 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, 21 February 2022.


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 446, 3.11.2021, p. 38.

(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).