do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-249/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 11 April 2022 — BM v Gebühren Info Service GmbH (GIS)
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, broadcasting, public institution, quasi-fiscal charge, taxable income, television equipment








C_2022237EN.01004101.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 237/41






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 11 April 2022 — BM v Gebühren Info Service GmbH (GIS)
(Case C-249/22)
(2022/C 237/52)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: BM

Defendant: Gebühren Info Service GmbH (GIS)

Joined parties: Bundesminister für Finanzen, Österreichischer Rundfunk (ORF)

Questions referred







1.


Taking into account the primary law provision of Article 151(1) in conjunction with Annex XV, Part IX, No. 2, letter h, first subparagraph, second indent, of the Act concerning the conditions of accession and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded, (1) must consideration such as the programme fee of the Österreichischer Rundfunk (Austrian Broadcasting Corporation, ‘ORF’), which the public service broadcaster sets itself in order to finance its operation, be regarded as consideration within the meaning of Article 2 in conjunction with Article 378(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (2) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax?










2.


If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, must the ORF programme fee referred to therein also be regarded as consideration within the meaning of Directive 2006/112 in so far as persons are obliged to pay it who, although they operate a broadcast receiver in a building which is supplied by the ORF with its terrestrial programmes, cannot receive those ORF programmes because they do not have the necessary receiver module?






(1)  Concluded together with the Treaty between the Kingdom of Belgium, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, Ireland, the Italian Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Portuguese Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Member States of the European Union) and the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden, concerning the accession of the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to the European Union (OJ 1994 C 241, p. 336).

(2)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Case C-250/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 11 April 2022 — Fallimento Villa di Campo Srl v Agenzia delle Entrate
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, commercial transaction, contract, goods and services, supply, tax authorities, tax law, tax relief, trade information, transfer of businesses








C_2022266EN.01001201.xml










11.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 266/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 11 April 2022 — Fallimento Villa di Campo Srl v Agenzia delle Entrate
(Case C-250/22)
(2022/C 266/15)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Fallimento Villa di Campo Srl

Cross-appellant: Agenzia delle Entrate

Question referred

Do Article 5(8) of Directive 77/388/EEC (1) and Article 19 of Directive 2006/112/EC (2) preclude national legislation such as Article 20 of Presidential Decree No 131 of 26 April 1986, as amended by points (1) and (2) of Article 1(87)(a) of Law No 205 of 27 December 2017 and by Article 1(1084) of Law No 145 of 30 December 2018, which requires that the tax authorities classify transactions between parties solely on the basis of the textual information contained in the relevant contract and prohibits the use of extrinsic (extratextual) information (even if it objectively exists and is proven), with the result that the tax authorities are absolutely precluded from proving that an economic supply, constituting a transfer of a business, which is in itself indissociable, has in reality been artificially broken down into a number of different supplies — multiple supplies of goods — and therefore gives rise to a right to deduct VAT where the requirements laid down by EU law are not met?


(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).

(2)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Notice to economic operators New round of requests for the suspension of the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on certain industrial and agricultural products 2022/C 157/09
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: CCT duties, agricultural product, common customs tariff, import (EU), industrial product, suspension of customs duties








C_2022157EN.01002301.xml










11.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 157/23






Notice to economic operators
New round of requests for the suspension of the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on certain industrial and agricultural products
(2022/C 157/09)
Economic operators are informed that the Commission has received requests in accordance with the administrative arrangements foreseen in the Commission Communication concerning autonomous tariff suspensions and quotas (2011/C 363/02) (1) for the January round of 2023.
The list of the products for which a duty suspension is requested is now available on the Commission’s thematic (Europa) website on the customs union (2).
Economic operators are also informed that the deadline for objections against new requests to reach the Commission, via the national administrations, is 21 June 2022 which is the date of the second scheduled meeting of the Economic Tariff Questions Group.
Interested operators are advised to consult the list regularly in order to be informed on the status as the requests.
More information on the autonomous tariff suspension procedure can be found on the Europa Internet:
Suspensions (Autonomous Tariff Suspensions) (europa.eu)


(1)  OJ C 363, 13.12.2011, p. 6.

(2)  http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/dds2/susp/susp_home.jsp?Lang=en
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 8 April 2022 2022/C 157/05
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022157EN.01001501.xml










11.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 157/15






Euro exchange rates (1)

8 April 2022
(2022/C 157/05)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0861 




JPY


Japanese yen


134,87 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4372 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83355 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2768 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0155 




ISK


Iceland króna


139,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,5080 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,479 




HUF


Hungarian forint


375,66 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6437 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9425 




TRY


Turkish lira


16,0237 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4552 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3675 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5134 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5849 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4801 




KRW


South Korean won


1 333,12 




ZAR


South African rand


15,9968 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9115 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5490 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 601,96 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5850 




PHP


Philippine peso


55,990 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,488 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,1583 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,8729 




INR


Indian rupee


82,3890 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-183/22: Action brought on 11 April 2022 — Eggers & Franke v EUIPO — E. & J. Gallo Winery (EF)
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, alcoholic beverage, business administration, business management, catering industry, consultancy, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022207EN.01005501.xml










23.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/55






Action brought on 11 April 2022 — Eggers & Franke v EUIPO — E. & J. Gallo Winery (EF)
(Case T-183/22)
(2022/C 207/73)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Eggers & Franke Holding GmbH (Bremen, Germany) (represented by: A. Ebert-Weidenfeller and H. Förster, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: E. & J. Gallo Winery (Modesto, California, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark EF — Application for registration No 17 927 894

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 February 2022 in Case R 729/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and in case of an intervention also the intervener 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
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10529 – HEIDELBERGCEMENT / THOMA BRAVO / COMMAND ALKON) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 258/02
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: building materials, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, software








C_2022258EN.01000201.xml










5.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10529 – HEIDELBERGCEMENT / THOMA BRAVO / COMMAND ALKON)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 258/02)
On 11 April 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 32022M10529. 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.10506 – PARKER / MEGGITT) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 274/01
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: aeronautical industry, aerospace industry, economic concentration, merger control








C_2022274EN.01000101.xml










18.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 274/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10506 – PARKER / MEGGITT)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 274/01)
On 11 April 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) in conjunction with Article 6(2) 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 32022M10506. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-253/22 P: Appeal brought on 11 April 2022 by Calrose Rice against the order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 11 February 2022 in Case T-459/21, Calrose Rice v EUIPO — Ricegrowers (Sunwhite)
Date: 2022-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, foodstuff, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, rice, trade-mark law








C_2022311EN.01000203.xml










16.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/2






Appeal brought on 11 April 2022 by Calrose Rice against the order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 11 February 2022 in Case T-459/21, Calrose Rice v EUIPO — Ricegrowers (Sunwhite)
(Case C-253/22 P)
(2022/C 311/04)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Calrose Rice (represented by: H. Raychev, адвокат)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Ricegrowers Ltd
By order of 6 July 2022, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Calrose Rice should bear its own costs.