do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 14 March 2022 2022/C 120/05
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022120EN.01002501.xml










15.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 120/25






Euro exchange rates (1)

14 March 2022
(2022/C 120/05)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0960 




JPY


Japanese yen


129,30 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4405 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83915 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5368 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0249 




ISK


Iceland króna


145,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,8588 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,890 




HUF


Hungarian forint


373,88 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,7218 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9490 




TRY


Turkish lira


16,2000 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5137 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3978 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5815 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6130 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4947 




KRW


South Korean won


1 357,77 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5029 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9738 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5745 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 678,53 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6087 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,398 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,590 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,5286 




MXN


Mexican peso


22,8311 




INR


Indian rupee


83,9310 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-220/21: Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Thomas Henry v EUIPO (Spicy Ginger) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, beer, carriage of goods, non-alcoholic beverage, packaging, registered trade mark, storage of food, tourism, trade-mark law








C_2022198EN.01004902.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/49






Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Thomas Henry v EUIPO (Spicy Ginger)
(Case T-220/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 198/72)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Thomas Henry GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch and N. Willich, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 February 2021 (Case R 435/2020-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign Spicy Ginger as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


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










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Thomas Henry GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10349 – AMAZON / MGM) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 474/02
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: copyright, culture industry, economic concentration, electronics industry, film industry, merger control, retail trade, service, technology








C_2022474EN.01002501.xml










14.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 474/25






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10349 – AMAZON / MGM)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 474/02)
On 15 March 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 32022M10349. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-202/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca do Porto — Juízo Local Cível da Maia (Portugal) lodged on 15 March 2022 — WH, NX v TAP — Transportes Aéreos Portugueses, SGPS, SA
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, bus, carriage of passengers, carrier, indemnification, traveller








C_2022244EN.01001601.xml










27.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/16






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca do Porto — Juízo Local Cível da Maia (Portugal) lodged on 15 March 2022 — WH, NX v TAP — Transportes Aéreos Portugueses, SGPS, SA
(Case C-202/22)
(2022/C 244/20)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Judicial da Comarca do Porto — Juízo Local Cível da Maia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: WH, NX

Defendant: TAP — Transportes Aéreos Portugueses, SGPS, SA

Questions referred







1.


In the light of Articles 5(1)(c), 6(1), 7(1) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 261/2004, (1) must compensation be paid in the same way as it is for flight delays where transport to the final destination by bus, which is provided by an operating air carrier to passengers who missed a flight connection, is very late?










2.


In the light of recital 14 and Article 7(3) of Regulation No 261/2004, does the breakdown of that bus and the need to replace it on the journey to the final destination constitute an extraordinary circumstance which exempts the air carrier from the obligation to pay compensation to passengers where the bus arrives at the final destination much later than its scheduled or expected arrival time?






(1)  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 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).
Case C-85/21: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — WY v Steiermärkische Landesregierung (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Citizenship of the Union — Articles 20 and 21 TFEU — Scope — Automatic loss of nationality of a Member State before the accession of that State to the European Union — Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU national, European citizenship, foreign national, free movement of workers, nationality, principle of proportionality








C_2022266EN.01000702.xml










11.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 266/7






Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — WY v Steiermärkische Landesregierung
(Case C-85/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Citizenship of the Union - Articles 20 and 21 TFEU - Scope - Automatic loss of nationality of a Member State before the accession of that State to the European Union - Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
(2022/C 266/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: WY

Respondent: Steiermärkische Landesregierung

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly has no jurisdiction to answer the question referred by the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark (Regional Administrative Court, Styria, Austria) by decision of 3 February 2021.


(1)  OJ C 148, 26.4.2021.
Case T-115/21: Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, pet food, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022198EN.01004901.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/49






Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover)
(Case T-115/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 198/71)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Growth Finance Plus AG (Gommiswald, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2020 (Case R 717/2020-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign catlover as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


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










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Case T-138/22: Action brought on 15 March 2022 — HCP v EUIPO — Timm Health Care (PYLOMED)
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022198EN.01005302.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/53






Action brought on 15 March 2022 — HCP v EUIPO — Timm Health Care (PYLOMED)
(Case T-138/22)
(2022/C 198/78)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: HCP GmbH (Hanover, Germany) (represented by: H. Suhren, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Timm Health Care BV (Borculo, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark PYLOMED — Application for registration No 18 132 059

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 January 2022 in Case R 814/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-614/21: Order of the President of the Court of 15 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag, zittingsplaats's-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — G v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, foreign national, fundamental rights, infringement of EU law, return migration, right of asylum, right to justice








C_2022359EN.01006001.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/60






Order of the President of the Court of 15 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag, zittingsplaats's-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — G v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
(Case C-614/21) (1)

(2022/C 359/68)
Language of the case: Dutch
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Case T-114/21: Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (doglover) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-03-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, pet food, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022198EN.01004802.xml










16.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/48






Order of the General Court of 15 March 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (doglover)
(Case T-114/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 198/70)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Growth Finance Plus AG (Gommiswald, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2020 (Case R 720/2020-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign doglover as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


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










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.