do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-386/22 P: Appeal brought on 13 June2022 by Martinair Holland NV against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 30 March 2022 in Case T-323/17, Martinair Holland v Commission
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Economic Area, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, international transport, powers of the institutions (EU), price agreement, sanction (EU)








C_2022303EN.01003001.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/30






Appeal brought on 13 June2022 by Martinair Holland NV against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 30 March 2022 in Case T-323/17, Martinair Holland v Commission
(Case C-386/22 P)
(2022/C 303/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Martinair Holland NV (represented by: R. Wesseling and F. Brouwer, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it holds that the Commission has jurisdiction to apply Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes; and










—


annul, the entire Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) (the Decision); or










—


in the alternative, partly annul the Decision insofar as it finds that the appellant infringed Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement with regard to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes; and










—


in any event, order the Commission to pay all the costs, including those incurred by the appellant before the Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the appellant relies on the following plea in law.
The General Court erred in law and infringed its duty to state reasons by concluding that the inbound freight services fall within the scope of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement.
First part: The General Court infringed its duty to state reasons, erred in law and violated Article 101 TFEU in concluding that inbound freight services sorted relevant effects in the EEA.
Second part: The General Court infringed its duty to state reasons, erred in law and violated Article 101 TFEU in concluding that inbound freight services sorted probable effects in the EEA.
Third part: The General Court erred in law by relying on arguments and evidence not advanced by the Commission.
Fourth part: The General Court erred in law and violated Article 101 TFEU by concluding that the single and continuous infringement can extend the Commission’s jurisdiction over conduct outside the EEA.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/939 of 13 June 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ (PDO))
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Türkiye, designation of origin, labelling, nut, product designation








L_2022164EN.01000101.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 164/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/939
of 13 June 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard of 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, Turkey’s application to register the name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ 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 ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, 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 June 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 69, 10.2.2022, p. 15.

(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 T-334/21: Order of the General Court of 13 June 2022 — Mendes de Almeida v Council (Civil service — Appointment of the European Prosecutors of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office — Appointment of one of the candidates nominated by Portugal — No dispute between the Union and one of its servants within the limits and under the conditions laid down in the Staff Regulations and the CEOS — Article 270 TFEU — Manifest lack of jurisdiction)
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Public Prosecutor's Office, abuse of power, administrator, appointment of members, equal treatment, public prosecutor's department, right to justice, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU)








C_2022303EN.01004701.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/47






Order of the General Court of 13 June 2022 — Mendes de Almeida v Council
(Case T-334/21) (1)

(Civil service - Appointment of the European Prosecutors of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office - Appointment of one of the candidates nominated by Portugal - No dispute between the Union and one of its servants within the limits and under the conditions laid down in the Staff Regulations and the CEOS - Article 270 TFEU - Manifest lack of jurisdiction)
(2022/C 303/60)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Ana Carla Mendes de Almeida (Sobreda, Portugal) (represented by: R. Leandro Vasconcelos, M. Marques de Carvalho and P. Almeida Sande, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: K. Pleśniak and J. Gil, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1117 of 27 July 2020 appointing the European Prosecutors of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (OJ 2020 L 244, p. 18), in so far as it appoints Mr José Eduardo Moreira Alves d’Oliveira Guerra as a European Prosecutor of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, and the annulment of the decision of the Council of the European Union of 8 March 2021 rejecting her complaint lodged on 10 February 2021 against the contested decision.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Ms Ana Carla Mendes de Almeida shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 320, 9.8.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10724 – ITOCHU / UNDER ARMOUR / DOME) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 236/01
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, footwear industry, merger control, public limited company, retail trade, textile industry








C_2022236EN.01000101.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10724 – ITOCHU / UNDER ARMOUR / DOME)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 236/01)
On 13 June 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 32022M10724. 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) 2022/941 of 13 June 2022 entering a name in the register of traditional specialities guaranteed (‘Sopa da Pedra de Almeirim’ (TSG))
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Portugal, designation of origin, labelling, prepared foodstuff, product designation








L_2022164EN.01000301.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 164/3








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/941
of 13 June 2022
         
entering a name in the register of traditional specialities guaranteed
(‘Sopa da Pedra de Almeirim’ (TSG))


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)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Portugal’s application to register the name ‘Sopa da Pedra de Almeirim’ 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 ‘Sopa da Pedra de Almeirim’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Sopa da Pedra de Almeirim’ (TSG) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 2.21. Prepared meals, 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 June 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 70, 11.2.2022, p. 23.

(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).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/940 of 13 June 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Maranho da Sertã’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Central Portugal, Portugal, designation of origin, labelling, meat product, product designation








L_2022164EN.01000201.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 164/2








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/940
of 13 June 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Maranho da Sertã’ (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard of 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, Portugal’s application to register the name ‘Maranho da Sertã’ 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 ‘Maranho da Sertã’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Maranho da Sertã’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.2. Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, 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 June 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 63, 7.2.2022, p. 15.

(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-385/22 P: Appeal brought on 13 June 2022 by Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 30 March 2022 in Case T-325/17, Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij v Commission
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Economic Area, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, international transport, price agreement, sanction (EU)








C_2022303EN.01002901.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/29






Appeal brought on 13 June 2022 by Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 30 March 2022 in Case T-325/17, Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij v Commission
(Case C-385/22 P)
(2022/C 303/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (represented by: R. Wesseling and F. Brouwer, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it holds that the Commission has jurisdiction to apply Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes; and










—


annul, the entire Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) (the Decision); or










—


in the alternative, partly annul the Decision insofar as it finds that the appellant infringed Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement with regard to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes; and










—


in any event, order the Commission to pay all the costs, including those incurred by the appellant before the Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the appellant relies on the following plea in law.
The General Court erred in law and infringed its duty to state reasons by concluding that the inbound freight services fall within the scope of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement.
First part: The General Court infringed its duty to state reasons, erred in law and violated Article 101 TFEU in concluding that inbound freight services sorted relevant effects in the EEA.
Second part: The General Court infringed its duty to state reasons, erred in law and violated Article 101 TFEU in concluding that inbound freight services sorted probable effects in the EEA.
Third part: The General Court erred in law by relying on arguments and evidence not advanced by the Commission.
Fourth part: The General Court erred in law and violated Article 101 TFEU by concluding that the single and continuous infringement can extend the Commission’s jurisdiction over conduct outside the EEA.
Case T-351/22: Action brought on 13 June 2022 — De Dietrich Process Systems v EUIPO — Koch-Glitsch (SCHEIBEL)
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, trade-mark law








C_2022294EN.01003701.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/37






Action brought on 13 June 2022 — De Dietrich Process Systems v EUIPO — Koch-Glitsch (SCHEIBEL)
(Case T-351/22)
(2022/C 294/53)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: De Dietrich Process Systems GmbH (Mainz, Germany) (represented by: M. Körner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Koch-Glitsch LP (Wichita, Kansas, United States)

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 SCHEIBEL — European Union trade mark No 3 790 375

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 April 2022 in Case R 1107/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and dismiss the European Union trade mark proprietor’s appeal against the decision of the Cancellation Division of the EUIPO dated 29 April 2021 (Case No 42 180 C) declaring European Union trade mark No 3 790 375 (‘SCHEIBEL’) invalid in its entirety;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a), read in conjunction with Article (7)(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a), read in conjunction with Article (7)(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.) 10 June 2022 2022/C 228/06
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022228EN.01000601.xml










13.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 228/6






Euro exchange rates (1)

10 June 2022
(2022/C 228/06)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0578 




JPY


Japanese yen


141,69 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4389 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85048 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5255 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0404 




ISK


Iceland króna


137,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1495 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,705 




HUF


Hungarian forint


398,48 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6053 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9442 




TRY


Turkish lira


18,0116 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4845 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3484 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,3031 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6482 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4620 




KRW


South Korean won


1 344,25 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5209 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,0868 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5225 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 393,27 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6564 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,101 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,774 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,1718 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,8285 




INR


Indian rupee


82,3355 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-352/22: Action brought on 13 June 2022 — De Dietrich Process Systems v EUIPO — Koch-Glitsch (KARR)
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, trade-mark law








C_2022294EN.01003801.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/38






Action brought on 13 June 2022 — De Dietrich Process Systems v EUIPO — Koch-Glitsch (KARR)
(Case T-352/22)
(2022/C 294/54)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: De Dietrich Process Systems GmbH (Mainz, Germany) (represented by: M. Körner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Koch-Glitsch LP (Wichita, Kansas, United States)

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 KARR — European Union trade mark No 3 790 359

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 April 2022 in Case R 1105/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and dismiss the European Union trade mark proprietor’s appeal against the decision of the Cancellation Division of the EUIPO dated 29 April 2021 (Case No 42 121 C) declaring European Union trade mark No 3 790 359 (‘KARR’) invalid in its entirety;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a), read in conjunction with Article (7)(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a), read in conjunction with Article (7)(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.10658 – NORSK HYDRO / ALUMETAL) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 228/05
Date: 2022-06-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: aluminium, bauxite, economic concentration, merger control, metallurgical industry, waste recycling








C_2022228EN.01000501.xml










13.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 228/5






Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case M.10658 – NORSK HYDRO / ALUMETAL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 228/05)
On 13 May 2022, the European Commission received notification (1) of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) (‘Merger Regulation’).
On 7 June 2022, the notifying party informed the Commission that it withdrew its notification.


(1)  OJ C 208, 24.5.2022, p. 6.

(2)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.