do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures 2022/C 195/06
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: China, India, anti-dumping duty, cast-iron, import (EU), originating product








C_2022195EN.01002301.xml










13.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/23






Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures
(2022/C 195/06)








1.


As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.




2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.
3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.








4.


This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.









Product


Country(ies) of origin or exportation


Measures


Reference


Date of expiry (3)





Certain cast iron articles


The People’s Republic of China


Anti-dumping duty


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/140 of 29 January 2018 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain cast iron articles originating in the People’s Republic of China and terminating the investigation on imports of certain cast iron articles originating in India
(OJ L 25, 30.1.2018, p. 6)


31.1.2023










(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10645 – 10645 – ETEX / XI (INSMAT) HOLDINGS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 10/01
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: building materials, economic concentration, insulator, merger control, thermal insulation








C_2023010EN.01000101.xml










12.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10645 – 10645 – ETEX / XI (INSMAT) HOLDINGS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 10/01)
On 13 May 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 32022M10645. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/787 of 13 May 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [‘Cancoillotte’ (PGI)]
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, France, Grand Est, cows’ milk cheese, designation of origin, labelling, product designation, soft cheese








L_2022141EN.01000601.xml










20.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 141/6








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/787
of 13 May 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [‘Cancoillotte’ (PGI)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, France’s application to register the name ‘Cancoillotte’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Cancoillotte’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Cancoillotte’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.4. Other products of animal origin (eggs, honey, various dairy products except butter, etc.), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 May 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 49, 31.1.2022, p. 7.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case C-323/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 13 May 2022 — KRI SpA, as the successor of SI.LO.NE. — Sistema logistico nord-est Srl v Agenzia delle dogane e dei monopoli
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carriage of goods, excise duty, storage, tax exemption








C_2022294EN.01001602.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/16






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 13 May 2022 — KRI SpA, as the successor of SI.LO.NE. — Sistema logistico nord-est Srl v Agenzia delle dogane e dei monopoli
(Case C-323/22)
(2022/C 294/23)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: KRI SpA, as the successor of SI.LO.NE. — Sistema logistico nord-est Srl

Respondent: Agenzia delle dogane e dei monopoli

Question referred

Must the first sentence of Article 14 of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 (1) be interpreted as meaning that in the event of irregular departure of the product subject to excise duty, the liability of the warehousekeeper guaranteeing payment of the duty is objective, with there being no possibility of exemption from that liability and from payment of the sums corresponding to the related financial penalties, even where that departure results from an unlawful act attributable — exclusively — to a third party, or can it be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from the tax and from the corresponding penalties is to be granted — as a fortuitous event or force majeure — to the guarantor warehousekeeper who not only has nothing whatsoever to do with the unlawful act of the third party but also had a legitimate and good faith expectation that the movement of the product under the duty suspension arrangement was regular?


(1)  Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/761 of 13 May 2022 approving non-minor amendments to the product specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Agneau du Périgord’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Aquitaine, France, Limousin, Occitanie, designation of origin, fresh meat, labelling, product designation, sheepmeat








L_2022139EN.01001501.xml










18.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 139/15








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/761
of 13 May 2022
         
approving non-minor amendments to the product specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Agneau du Périgord’ (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined France’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Agneau du Périgord’, registered under Commission Regulation (EU) No 1163/2010 (2).












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the product specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Agneau du Périgord’ (PGI) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 May 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 1163/2010 of 9 December 2010 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Agneau du Périgord (PGI)] (OJ L 326, 10.12.2010, p. 64).

(3)  
            OJ C 42, 27.1.2022, p. 3.
Case T-264/22: Action brought on 13 May 2022 — Suicha v EUIPO — Michael Kors (Switzerland) International (MK MARKTOMI MARKTOMI)
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022244EN.01004702.xml










27.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 244/47






Action brought on 13 May 2022 — Suicha v EUIPO — Michael Kors (Switzerland) International (MK MARKTOMI MARKTOMI)
(Case T-264/22)
(2022/C 244/64)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Lin Suicha (Zhejiang, China) (represented by: J. Donoso Romero, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Michael Kors (Switzerland) International GmbH (Manno, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark MK MARKTOMI MARKTOMI — European Union trade mark No 17 946 599

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 March 2022 in Case R 1899/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in all its pronouncements;










—


reject the application for a declaration of invalidity in its entirety;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 12 May 2022 2022/C 195/04
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022195EN.01001001.xml










13.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/10






Euro exchange rates (1)

12 May 2022
(2022/C 195/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0408 




JPY


Japanese yen


133,85 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4413 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85293 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5648 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0377 




ISK


Iceland króna


139,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,2898 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,925 




HUF


Hungarian forint


382,20 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6680 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9470 




TRY


Turkish lira


16,0132 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5163 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3569 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,1702 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6692 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4529 




KRW


South Korean won


1 341,98 




ZAR


South African rand


16,8806 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,0691 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5235 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 255,73 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5725 




PHP


Philippine peso


54,589 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,150 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,4161 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,2531 




INR


Indian rupee


80,6670 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-261/22: Action brought on 13 May 2022 — mBank v EUIPO — European Merchant Bank (EMBANK European Merchant Bank)
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, banking, financial services, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022257EN.01003802.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/38






Action brought on 13 May 2022 — mBank v EUIPO — European Merchant Bank (EMBANK European Merchant Bank)
(Case T-261/22)
(2022/C 257/50)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: mBank S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: E. Skrzydło-Tefelska and M. Stępkowski, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: European Merchant Bank UAB (Vilnius, Lithuania)

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 figurative mark EMBANK European Merchant Bank — European Union trade mark No 18 048 966

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 February 2022 in Case R 1845/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


alter the contested decision and uphold the application for a declaration of invalidity in its entirety;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant, including those incurred in the proceedings before EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.










—


Infringement of Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council in conjunction with Article 27(4) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.
Case C-326/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 13 May 2022 — Z. sp. z o.o. v A. S.A.
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, consumer credit, consumer information, contract, cost of borrowing, redemption








C_2022318EN.01002602.xml










22.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/26






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 13 May 2022 — Z. sp. z o.o. v A. S.A.
(Case C-326/22)
(2022/C 318/38)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Z. sp. z o.o.

Defendant: A. S.A.

Question referred

In the context of the principle of the effectiveness of EU law, must Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (1) be understood as meaning that a consumer, or an undertaking to which a consumer has transferred his/her rights arising from that provision of the directive, may request, pursuant to it, that the creditor hand over a copy of the agreement (as well as the terms of business forming part of the agreement), and information on repayment of the credit which are necessary in order to verify the correctness of the calculation of the sums paid to the consumer as repayment of the proportion of the total cost of the credit in connection with the early repayment thereof and necessary in order to bring a claim for any repayment of the aforementioned amounts?


(1)  OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66.
Case T-265/22: Action brought on 13 May 2022 — PSCC 2012 v EUIPO — Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide (LA BOTTEGA W)
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, foodstuff, mineral water, registered trade mark, retail selling, trade-mark law








C_2022257EN.01004001.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/40






Action brought on 13 May 2022 — PSCC 2012 v EUIPO — Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide (LA BOTTEGA W)
(Case T-265/22)
(2022/C 257/52)
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties


Applicant: PSCC 2012 Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: P. Alessandrini and E. Montelione, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide LLC (Bethesda, Maryland, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark LA BOTTEGA W — EU trade mark No 11 592 581

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 February 2022 in Case R 621/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul and vary the contested decision and reject the application for cancellation of the mark LA BOTTEGA W;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 60 and 8 of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.










—


Infringement of Article 42 of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal.










—


Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10684 – SWISS LIFE / VAUBAN / WASCOSA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 218/01
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, insurance, investment company, large vehicle, merger control, vehicle fleet, vehicle rental








C_2022218EN.01000101.xml










2.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 218/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10684 – SWISS LIFE / VAUBAN / WASCOSA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 218/01)
On 13 May 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 Redgulation (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 32022M10684. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-586/21: Order of the General Court of 13 May 2022 — Swords v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Refusal of access to documents on the basis of the protection of the purpose of investigations — Confirmatory application — Implied refusal of access — Express decision adopted after the action was brought — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Ireland, access to EU information, coronavirus disease, epidemic, free movement of persons, public health








C_2022284EN.01003802.xml










25.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 284/38






Order of the General Court of 13 May 2022 — Swords v Commission
(Case T-586/21) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Refusal of access to documents on the basis of the protection of the purpose of investigations - Confirmatory application - Implied refusal of access - Express decision adopted after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 284/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Patrick Swords (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: G. Byrne, Barrister at Law)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Spina and C. Ehrbar, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the implied decision of the European Commission of 13 July 2021, by which the Commission, pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), rejected his request for access to all the documents relating to the information which it had received from Ireland concerning the benefits to public health linked to the travel restrictions between the Member States of the European Union in place since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Operative part of the order







1.


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










2.


The European Commission, in addition to bearing its own costs, shall pay those incurred by Mr Patrick Swords.






(1)  OJ C 490, 6.12.2021.