do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-315/22 P: Appeal brought on 9 May 2022 by Ahmad Aziz against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 5 May 2022 in Case T-789/21, Aziz v EEAS
Date: 2022-05-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to EU information, admissibility, civil proceedings, criminal proceedings, data protection, personal data








C_2023045EN.01000302.xml










6.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/3






Appeal brought on 9 May 2022 by Ahmad Aziz against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 5 May 2022 in Case T-789/21, Aziz v EEAS
(Case C-315/22 P)
(2023/C 45/04)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Ahmad Aziz (represented by: L. Cuschieri, avukat)

Other party to the proceedings: European External Action Service
By order of 19 December 2022, The Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) held that the appeal is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded and that Mr Ahmad Aziz shall bear his own costs.
Case C-317/22 P: Appeal brought on 9 May 2022 by Ahmad Aziz against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 5 May 2022 in Case T-808/21, Aziz v EEAS
Date: 2022-05-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to EU information, admissibility, civil proceedings, criminal proceedings, data protection, personal data








C_2023045EN.01000303.xml










6.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/3






Appeal brought on 9 May 2022 by Ahmad Aziz against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 5 May 2022 in Case T-808/21, Aziz v EEAS
(Case C-317/22 P)
(2023/C 45/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Ahmad Aziz (represented by: L. Cuschieri, avukat)

Other party to the proceedings: European External Action Service
By order of 19 December 2022, The Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) held that the appeal is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded and that Mr Ahmad Aziz shall bear his own costs.
Case C-303/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský soud v Brně (Czech Republic) lodged on 9 May 2022 — CROSS Zlín a.s. v Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže
Date: 2022-05-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Czechia, award of contract, legality, national law, public procurement, right to justice, tendering








C_2022311EN.01000401.xml










16.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/4






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský soud v Brně (Czech Republic) lodged on 9 May 2022 — CROSS Zlín a.s. v Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže
(Case C-303/22)
(2022/C 311/06)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Krajský soud v Brně

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: CROSS Zlín a.s.

Defendant: Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže

Question referred

Is it compatible with Articles 2(3) and 2a(2) of Directive 89/665/EEC, (1) interpreted in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, for Czech legislation to permit a contracting authority to conclude a public contract before an action is brought before a court competent to review the legality of a second-instance decision of the Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Office for the Protection of Competition) to exclude a tenderer?


(1)  Council Directive of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts (OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33).
Case T-253/22: Action brought on 9 May 2022 — Groschopp v EUIPO (Sustainability through Quality)
Date: 2022-05-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electrical equipment, electronic equipment, engine, information technology industry, pulp and paper industry, registered trade mark, research, service, trade-mark law








C_2022237EN.01007801.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 237/78






Action brought on 9 May 2022 — Groschopp v EUIPO (Sustainability through Quality)
(Case T-253/22)
(2022/C 237/99)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Groschopp AG Drives & More (Viersen, Germany) (represented by: R. Schiffer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘Sustainability through Quality’ — Application for registration No 18 158 368

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 March 2022 in Case R 1076/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-252/22: Action brought on 9 May 2022 — Timchenko v Council
Date: 2022-05-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Ukraine, economic sanctions, indemnification, international sanctions, natural person, territorial dispute, territorial law








C_2022244EN.01004501.xml










27.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/45






Action brought on 9 May 2022 — Timchenko v Council
(Case T-252/22)
(2022/C 244/61)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Gennady Nikolayevich Timchenko (Geneva, Switzerland) (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme, L. Burguin, S. Bonifassi and E. Fedorova, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/337/CFSP (1) of 28 February 2022 in so far as it lists the applicant under No 694 of the annex to that decision;










—


annul Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/336 (2) of 28 February 2022 in so far as it lists the applicant under No 694 of the annex to that regulation;










—


order the Council to pay EUR 1 000 000, on a provisional basis, in respect of the non-material damage suffered by the applicant;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to effective judicial protection and of the obligation to state reasons.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality and of fundamental rights.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging manifest error of assessment, in particular as regards the ground based on the relationship between the applicant and President Putin, of the applicant’s status as shareholder in the Volga Group, and of his status as shareholder in Bank Rossiya.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the Treaties, in particular, of the principle of the free movement of citizens of the European Union and of the rules relating to the applicable legal basis.






(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/337 of 28 February 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 59, p. 1).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/336 of 28 February 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 58, p. 1).
Case C-324/22 P: Appeal brought on 9 May 2022 by Union nationale des indépendants solidaires (UNIS) against the order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 8 March 2022 in Case T-431/21 UNIS v Commission
Date: 2022-05-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU competition policy, admissibility, control of restrictive practices, interpretation of the law, monopoly, powers of the institutions (EU), social security








C_2023024EN.01001902.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/19






Appeal brought on 9 May 2022 by Union nationale des indépendants solidaires (UNIS) against the order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 8 March 2022 in Case T-431/21 UNIS v Commission
(Case C-324/22 P)
(2023/C 24/26)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Union nationale des indépendants solidaires (UNIS) (represented by: F. Ortega, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
By order of 1 December 2022, the Court (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal as manifestly unfounded and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.