do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-806/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — Govern d’Andorra v EUIPO (Andorra) (European Union trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark Andorra — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, education, financial services, publishing, real estate business, registered trade mark, tobacco, trade-mark law, travel agency








C_2022171EN.01002601.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/26






Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — Govern d’Andorra v EUIPO (Andorra)
(Case T-806/19) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark Andorra - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 171/32)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Govern d’Andorra (Andorra la Vella, Andorra) (represented by: P. González Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and A. Crawcour, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 August 2019 (Case R 737/2018-2), concerning an application for registration of figurative sign Andorra as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Govern d’Andorra to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 27, 27.1.2020.
Case T-709/20: Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — OJ v Commission (Civil Service — Officials — Recruitment — Competition EPSO/AD/380/19 — Decision to refuse to extend the test dates for a competition — Time limits set for passing a selection test in a test centre — Right to a fair procedure — Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff — Equal treatment)
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, competition (EU), equal treatment, recruitment, right to justice








C_2022148EN.01002302.xml










4.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/23






Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — OJ v Commission
(Case T-709/20) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Recruitment - Competition EPSO/AD/380/19 - Decision to refuse to extend the test dates for a competition - Time limits set for passing a selection test in a test centre - Right to a fair procedure - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Equal treatment)
(2022/C 148/31)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: OJ (represented by: H.-E. von Harpe, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Hohenecker and I. Melo Sampaio, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, in essence, annulment of the decision of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) of 30 January 2020, by which that office refused to extend the date of the selection test for competition EPSO/AD/380/19.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders OJ to pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 28, 25.1.2021.
Case T-184/21: Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik v EUIPO — Schuju (Хозяин) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark Хозяин — Earlier national figurative mark хозяюшка — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, foodstuff, fruit, meat, non-alcoholic beverage, processed food product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable








C_2022171EN.01003202.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/32






Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik v EUIPO — Schuju (Хозяин)
(Case T-184/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Хозяин - Earlier national figurative mark хозяюшка - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 171/42)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik GmbH (Bühl, Germany) (represented by: A. Lingenfelser, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Peter Schuju (Borchen, Germany) (represented by: K. Borstel, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 December 2020 (Case R 2729/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mr Schuju and Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.
Case T-603/21 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — WO v European Public Prosecutor’s Office (Application for interim measures — Law governing the institutions — Enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office — Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 — Appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office — Appointment of one of the candidates nominated by Lithuania — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Failure to comply with procedural requirements — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Public Prosecutor's Office, European official, Lithuania, admissibility, appointment of members, competition (EU), enhanced cooperation, public prosecutor's department








C_2022171EN.01003902.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/39






Order of the President of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — WO v European Public Prosecutor’s Office
(Case T-603/21 R)
(Application for interim measures - Law governing the institutions - Enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office - Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 - Appointment of the European Delegated Prosecutors of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office - Appointment of one of the candidates nominated by Lithuania - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Failure to comply with procedural requirements - Inadmissibility)
(2022/C 171/53)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: WO (represented by: V. Vitkovskis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Public Prosecutor’s Office

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for suspension of operation of Decision No 28/2021 of the College of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office of 21 April 2021 rejecting the applicant’s candidacy for the position of European Delegated Public Prosecutor.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10595 – CERBERUS / HBCE (FRENCH RETAIL BANKING)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 104/03
Date: 2022-02-23
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_2022104EN.01000301.xml










4.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10595 – CERBERUS / HBCE (FRENCH RETAIL BANKING))
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 104/03)
On 23 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 32022M10595. 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.) 22 February 2022 2022/C 87/01
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022087EN.01000101.xml










23.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 87/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

22 February 2022
(2022/C 87/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1342 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,54 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4392 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83685 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5996 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0422 




ISK


Iceland króna


141,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1018 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,496 




HUF


Hungarian forint


355,89 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5447 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9464 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,6959 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5739 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4441 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8495 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6848 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5268 




KRW


South Korean won


1 353,34 




ZAR


South African rand


17,1768 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1771 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5370 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 293,92 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7472 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,208 




RUB


Russian rouble


89,8055 




THB


Thai baht


36,748 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,7677 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,0330 




INR


Indian rupee


84,7580 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-834/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — United Parcel Service v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Competition — Markets for international express small package delivery services in the EEA — Concentration — Decision declaring the concentration incompatible with the internal market — Annulment of the decision by a judgment of the Court — Rights of the defence — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals — Causal link)
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, delivery, economic concentration, international transport, logistics, merger control, rights of the defence








C_2022171EN.01002401.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/24






Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — United Parcel Service v Commission
(Case T-834/17) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Competition - Markets for international express small package delivery services in the EEA - Concentration - Decision declaring the concentration incompatible with the internal market - Annulment of the decision by a judgment of the Court - Rights of the defence - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals - Causal link)
(2022/C 171/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: United Parcel Service, Inc. (Atlanta, Georgia, United States) (represented by: A. Ryan, Solicitor, F. Hoseinian, W. Knibbeler, A. Pliego Selie and F. Roscam Abbing, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan, P. Berghe, M. Farley and R. Leupold Henning, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 268 TFEU for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the unlawfulness of Commission Decision C(2013) 431 of 30 January 2013 declaring a concentration incompatible with the internal market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.6570 — UPS/TNT Express).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay one third of the costs incurred by United Parcel Service, Inc.;










3.


Orders United Parcel Service to bear two thirds of its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 72, 26.2.2018.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 41/2022 of 23 February 2022 amending Annex V (Free movement of workers) and Annex VIII (Right of establishment) to the EEA Agreement [2022/1109]
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: EU national, European Economic Area, border control, coronavirus disease, epidemic, free movement of persons, health certificate, health control, internal border of the EU, revision of an agreement, vaccination




L_2022182EN.01000101.xml










7.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 182/1








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 41/2022
of 23 February 2022
         
amending Annex V (Free movement of workers) and Annex VIII (Right of establishment) to the EEA Agreement [2022/1109]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2288 of 21 December 2021 amending the Annex to Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the acceptance period of vaccination certificates issued in the EU Digital COVID Certificate format indicating the completion of the primary vaccination series (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annexes V and VIII to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is added in point 10 (Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex V to the EEA Agreement:






 



                        ‘, as amended by:






—



32021 R 2288: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2288 of 21 December 2021 (OJ L 458, 22.12.2021, p. 459).’
                              










Article 2
The following is added in point 11 (Regulation (EU) 2021/953 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex VIII to the EEA Agreement:






 



                        ‘, as amended by:






—



32021 R 2288: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2288 of 21 December 2021 (OJ L 458, 22.12.2021, p. 459).’
                              










Article 3
The text of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2288 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 4
This Decision shall enter into force on 23 February 2022, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).


Article 5
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 23 February 2022.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Nicolas VON LINGEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 458, 22.12.2021, p. 459.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10603 – CARLYLE / ALTADIA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 87/04
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: ceramics, economic concentration, floor coverings, investment company, merger control








C_2022087EN.01001501.xml










23.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 87/15






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10603 – CARLYLE / ALTADIA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 87/04)

1.   
On 14 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:






—


The Carlyle Group Inc. (USA) (hereinafter, ‘Carlyle’),










—


LSFX Flavum Topco, S.L. (Spain) (hereinafter, ‘Altadia’), currently controlled by Lone Star Funds (USA) through its holding company LSF10 Flavum Holdings S.à.r.l (Luxembourg).




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned:






—


Carlyle is a global alternative asset manager, which manages funds investing globally across three investment disciplines: (i) Global Private Equity; (ii) Global Credit; and (iii) Investment Solutions;










—


Altadia is engaged in the development, production and marketing of ceramic tile intermediates for ceramic tiles used in the construction trade (i.e., in floors, walls and countertops).






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.10603 – CARLYLE / ALTADIA
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’).
Notice to importers Imports of products into the Union under the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement from the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts of Ukraine 2022/C 87 I/01
Date: 2022-02-23
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Ukraine, association agreement (EU), customs regulations, import (EU), originating product, tariff exemption, territorial dispute, territorial law








CI2022087EN.01000101.xml










23.2.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CI 87/1






Notice to importers
Imports of products into the Union under the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement from the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts of Ukraine
(2022/C 87 I/01)
The European Commission informs importers that the necessary conditions for the customs authorities of Ukraine to effectively manage and control the preferential tariff treatment provided under the Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part are not in place for goods produced in or exported from the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts of Ukraine.
In the absence of the possibility by the customs authorities of Ukraine to apply the relevant provisions of the Agreement to guarantee that goods from those areas are entitled to preferential tariff treatment and to verify that they comply with all the necessary requirements, as provided for notably under Article 33 of Protocol 1 of the Association Agreement, the conditions for such goods to benefit from the preferential tariff treatment are not met.
Therefore, operators of the European Union are advised not to claim preferential treatment for the import into the Union of all goods produced in or exported from the non-government controlled areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts of Ukraine, since the release of these goods for free circulation gives rise to a customs debt as from date of publication of this notice.