do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-294/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 3 May 2022 — Office français de protection des réfugiés et apatrides (OFPRA) v SW
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Palestine, UNRWA, aid to refugees, foreign national, health care, illness, refugee, right of asylum, right to health, right to physical integrity








C_2022276EN.01000601.xml










18.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/6






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 3 May 2022 — Office français de protection des réfugiés et apatrides (OFPRA) v SW
(Case C-294/22)
(2022/C 276/09)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Office français de protection des réfugiés et apatrides (OFPRA)

Defendant: SW

Questions referred







1.


Irrespective of the provisions of national law according to which, under certain circumstances, foreign nationals can be allowed to stay on account of their state of health, and which where necessary protect them from an expulsion order, must Article 12(1)(a) of Directive 2011/95/EU (1) be interpreted as meaning that where a sick Palestinian refugee, after actually availing himself of UNRWA protection or assistance, leaves the State or territory in the area of operations of that agency in which he had his habitual residence because he cannot have sufficient access there to the care and treatment required by his state of health and because that failure to provide care and treatment presents a genuine risk to his life or physical integrity, there is reason to consider that his personal safety is at serious risk and that he is in a situation in which it is impossible for UNRWA to guarantee that his living conditions will be commensurate with the mission entrusted to it?










2.


If the answer is in the affirmative, what are the criteria for identifying such a situation, concerning for example the seriousness of the illness or the nature of the care needed?






(1)  Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (recast) (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10629 – CSL / VIFOR PHARMA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 180/05
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: biotechnology, economic concentration, merger control, pharmaceutical industry








C_2022180EN.01001401.xml










3.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 180/14






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10629 – CSL / VIFOR PHARMA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 180/05)

1.   
On 26 April 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:






—


CSL Behring AG (‘CSL Behring’, Australia), controlled by CSL Limited (‘CSL’, Australia), a public company listed on the Australian Security Exchange,










—


Vifor Pharma Limited (‘Vifor Pharma’, Switzerland), a public company listed on the Swiss Stock Exchange.




CSL will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control over Vifor Pharma.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced by CSL Limited on 14 December 2021.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


CSL is a biotechnology company with a portfolio of medicines, including those that treat hemophilia and immune deficiencies (through CSL Behring), as well as vaccines to prevent influenza (through Seqirus), and through CSL Plasma, a division of CSL Behring, it operates a plasma collection network,










—


Vifor Pharma is active worldwide in the development, manufacturing, and marketing of pharmaceutical products for the treatment of iron deficiency, nephrology (kidney care), and cardio-renal therapies.






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.10629 – CSL / VIFOR PHARMA
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’).
Case T-243/22: Action brought on 3 May 2022 — Pšonka v Council
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2022244EN.01004101.xml










27.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/41






Action brought on 3 May 2022 — Pšonka v Council
(Case T-243/22)
(2022/C 244/56)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Artem Viktorovyč Pšonka (Kramatorsk, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/376 of 3 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/375 of 3 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, to the extent to which they relate to the applicant;










—


order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to sound administration.






—


The applicant claims in support of his action, inter alia, that the Council of the European Union did not act with due care and attention in the adoption of the contested decision, since before the adoption of the contested decision it did not address the applicant’s arguments and the evidence he had adduced, which supports his case, and it primarily based its decision on information provided by the Ukrainian institutions and did not request any supplementary information on the course of the investigations in the Ukraine.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s right to property.






—


The applicant claims in this connection that the restrictions adopted against him are disproportionate, go beyond what is necessary and amount to an infringement of guarantees under international law of protection of the applicant’s right to property.














3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the applicant’s fundamental rights guaranteed under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.






—


The applicant claims in this connection that in the adoption of the restrictive measures against him, his right to a fair trial and to the presumption of innocence were infringed, as were his rights of the defence and his right to the protection of private property.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 May 2022 on the proposal for a Council decision on the application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in the area of the Schengen Information System in the Republic of Cyprus (COM(2021)0472 — C9-0350/2021 — 2021/0266(NLE))
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Cyprus, Schengen Information System, application of EU law, border control, data protection, exchange of information, internal border of the EU, personal data








C_2022465EN.01021001.xml










6.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 465/210






P9_TA(2022)0132
Application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in the area of the Schengen Information System in Cyprus *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 May 2022 on the proposal for a Council decision on the application of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in the area of the Schengen Information System in the Republic of Cyprus (COM(2021)0472 — C9-0350/2021 — 2021/0266(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2022/C 465/20)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2021)0472),










—


having regard to Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0350/2021),










—


having regard to Rule 82 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A9-0082/2022),












1.


Approves the Commission proposal;












2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;












4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.
Case C-301/22: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court (Ireland) made on 3 May 2022 — NN v An Bord Pleanála, Ireland and the Attorney General
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: building permit, development plan, environmental impact, lake, protected area, water protection








C_2022276EN.01000701.xml










18.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/7






Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court (Ireland) made on 3 May 2022 — NN v An Bord Pleanála, Ireland and the Attorney General
(Case C-301/22)
(2022/C 276/10)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court (Ireland)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: NN

Respondents: An Bord Pleanála, Ireland and the Attorney General

Notice parties: Bradán Beo Teoranta and Galway County Council

Questions referred







1.








(a)


Are member states required to characterise and subsequently classify all water bodies, irrespective of size, and in particular is there a requirement to characterise and classify all lakes with a topological surface area below 0,5 km2?










(b)


To what extent is the position different with respect to water bodies in a protected area, if at all?














2.


If the answer to question 1(a) is yes, can a competent authority for the purposes of development consent grant development consent for a project that may affect the water body prior to it being categorised and classified?










3.


If the answer to question 1(a) is no, what are the obligations on a competent authority when deciding upon an application for development consent that potentially affects a water body not characterised and/or classified?
Case T-242/22: Action brought on 3 May 2022 — OmniActive Health Technologies v EUIPO — Pharmaselect International (LUTAMAX)
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022237EN.01007502.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 237/75






Action brought on 3 May 2022 — OmniActive Health Technologies v EUIPO — Pharmaselect International (LUTAMAX)
(Case T-242/22)
(2022/C 237/96)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: OmniActive Health Technologies Ltd (Mumbai, India) (represented by: M. Hawkins, Solicitor, T. Dolde and C. Zimmer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pharmaselect International Beteiligungs GmbH (Vienna, Austria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark LUTAMAX — European Union trade mark No 3 472 974

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 February 2022 in Joined Cases R 524/2021-1 and R 649/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


partially annul the contested decision to the extent that it ordered EUTM No 3472974 LUTAMAX to remain on the register for ‘Dietary supplements adapted for medical or dietetic use for supporting eye health, none of the aforesaid goods for veterinary purposes’;










—


order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant and/or the other party before the Board of Appeal (assuming it intervenes in the proceedings).





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 58(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 May 2022 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC as regards the extension of the application period of the optional reverse charge mechanism in relation to supplies of certain goods and services susceptible to fraud and of the Quick Reaction Mechanism against VAT fraud (COM(2022)0039 — C9-0053/2022 — 2022/0027(CNS))
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, goods and services, provision of services, supply, tax harmonisation, tax law, tax offence, taxpayer








C_2022465EN.01020901.xml










6.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 465/209






P9_TA(2022)0131
Common system of value added tax (VAT): extension of the application period of the optional reverse charge mechanism in relation to supplies of certain goods and services susceptible to fraud and of the Quick Reaction Mechanism against VAT fraud *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 May 2022 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC as regards the extension of the application period of the optional reverse charge mechanism in relation to supplies of certain goods and services susceptible to fraud and of the Quick Reaction Mechanism against VAT fraud (COM(2022)0039 — C9-0053/2022 — 2022/0027(CNS))
(Special legislative procedure — consultation)
(2022/C 465/19)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2022)0039),










—


having regard to Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0053/2022),










—


having regard to Rule 82 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A9-0128/2022),












1.


Approves the Commission proposal;












2.


Asks the Commission to carry out an assessment of the effects of the reverse charge mechanism before any further extension of its application period;












3.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












4.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;












5.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
European Parliament decision of 3 May 2022 on the nomination of Lefteris Christoforou as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0042/2022 — 2022/0802(NLE))
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, European Parliament
Subjects: appointment of members, member of the Court of Auditors (EU)








C_2022465EN.01021101.xml










6.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 465/211






P9_TA(2022)0133
Nomination of a member of the Court of Auditors — Lefteris Christoforou
European Parliament decision of 3 May 2022 on the nomination of Lefteris Christoforou as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0042/2022 — 2022/0802(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2022/C 465/21)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0042/2022),










—


having regard to Rule 129 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0132/2022),










A.


whereas, by letter of 10 February 2022, the Council consulted Parliament on the nomination of Lefteris Christoforou as a Member of the Court of Auditors;










B.


whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control then proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; whereas in carrying out that evaluation, the committee received a curriculum vitae from the nominee as well as the nominee’s replies to the written questionnaire that he had been sent;










C.


whereas the committee subsequently held a hearing with the nominee on 21 April 2022, at which the nominee made an opening statement and then answered questions put by the members of the committee;












1.


Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Lefteris Christoforou as a Member of the Court of Auditors;












2.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.
Case C-453/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře — Czech Republic) — CityRail a.s. v Správa železnic, státní organizace (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 267 TFUE — Concept of ‘court or tribunal’ — Criteria relating to the constitution and function of that body — Exercise of judicial or administrative functions — Directive 2012/34/EU — Articles 55 and 56 — Single national regulatory body for the railway sector — Independent regulatory authority for the sector — Entitlement to act on an ex officio basis — Power to impose penalties — Decisions that are open to challenge before the courts — Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carriage of goods, charges for use of infrastructure, equal treatment, public sector, rail transport








C_2022244EN.01000801.xml










27.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/8






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře — Czech Republic) — CityRail a.s. v Správa železnic, státní organizace
(Case C-453/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 267 TFUE - Concept of ‘court or tribunal’ - Criteria relating to the constitution and function of that body - Exercise of judicial or administrative functions - Directive 2012/34/EU - Articles 55 and 56 - Single national regulatory body for the railway sector - Independent regulatory authority for the sector - Entitlement to act on an ex officio basis - Power to impose penalties - Decisions that are open to challenge before the courts - Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)
(2022/C 244/09)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: CityRail a.s.

Defendant: Správa železnic, státní organizace

Intervening party: ČD Cargo a.s.

Operative part of the judgment

The request for a preliminary ruling from the Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře (Transport infrastructure access authority, Czech Republic) is inadmissible.


(1)  OJ C 62, 22.2.2021.
Case C-300/22 P: Appeal brought on 3 May 2022 by Govern d’Andorra against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 23 February 2022 in Case T-806/19, Govern d’Andorra v EUIPO
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, education, financial services, publishing, real estate business, registered trade mark, tobacco, trade-mark law, travel agency








C_2022340EN.01001403.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/14






Appeal brought on 3 May 2022 by Govern d’Andorra against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 23 February 2022 in Case T-806/19, Govern d’Andorra v EUIPO
(Case C-300/22 P)
(2022/C 340/18)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Govern d'Andorra (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, abogado)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 12 May 2022, the Vice-President of the Court of Justice declared the appeal inadmissible and ordered Govern d’Andorra to bear its own costs.
Case C-290/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 3 May 2022 — NOS-SGPS SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
Date: 2022-05-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, financial institution, financial supervision, holding company, legal domicile, shareholding








C_2022318EN.01002401.xml










22.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/24






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 3 May 2022 — NOS-SGPS SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-290/22)
(2022/C 318/34)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: NOS-SGPS SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Question referred

Does a holding company domiciled in Portugal and governed by the provisions of Decree-Law No 495/88 of 30 December 1988, the sole object of which is to manage shareholdings in companies other than those operating in the insurance sector, fall within the concept of financial institution within the meaning of point (22) of Article 3(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU (1) and point (26) of Article 4(1) of Regulation EU No 575/2013? (2)



(1)  Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 338).

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1).