do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Joined Cases C-65/21 P and C-73/21 P to C-75/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 June 2022 — SGL Carbon SE (C-65/21 P), Química del Nalón SA, formerly Industrial Química del Nalón SA (C-73/21 P), Deza a.s. (C-74/21 P), Bilbaína de Alquitranes SA (C-75/21 P) v European Commission, Kingdom of Spain, European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (Appeals — Environment — Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 — Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures — Regulation (EU) No 944/2013 — Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance — Annulment — Actions for damages)
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aquatic environment, classification, environmental impact, environmental protection, petroleum product, toxic substance








C_2022303EN.01000701.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/7






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 June 2022 — SGL Carbon SE (C-65/21 P), Química del Nalón SA, formerly Industrial Química del Nalón SA (C-73/21 P), Deza a.s. (C-74/21 P), Bilbaína de Alquitranes SA (C-75/21 P) v European Commission, Kingdom of Spain, European Chemicals Agency (ECHA)
(Joined Cases C-65/21 P and C-73/21 P to C-75/21 P) (1)

(Appeals - Environment - Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 - Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures - Regulation (EU) No 944/2013 - Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance - Annulment - Actions for damages)
(2022/C 303/08)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: SGL Carbon SE (C-65/21 P), Química del Nalón SA, formerly Industrial Química del Nalón SA (C-73/21 P), Deza a.s. (C-74/21 P), Bilbaína de Alquitranes SA (C-75/21 P) (represented by: M. Grunchard, P. Sellar and K. Van Maldegem, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, R. Lindenthal and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz and M.J. Ruiz Sánchez, acting as Agents), European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: W. Broere, M. Heikkilä and S. Mahoney, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeals;










2.


Orders SGL Carbon SE, Química del Nalón SA, Deza a.s. and Bilbaína de Alquitranes SA to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Notice of open competition 2022/C 233/11
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), defence policy, job vacancy, recruitment, space policy








C_2022233EN.01003501.xml










16.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 233/35






NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
(2022/C 233/11)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:

EPSO/AD/400/22 – Administrators (AD 7) and experts (AD 9) in the fields of defence industry and space

The competition notice is published in 24 languages in Official Journal of the European Union

C 233 A of 16 June 2022.

Further information can be found on the EPSO Internet: https://epso.europa.eu/
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10729 – FOWI / MOL / TOHO / HOKURIKU / ORSTED / JERA / SWA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 240/03
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: bioenergy, economic concentration, electrical industry, electricity supply, fuel, gas industry, investment, maritime shipping, merger control, offshore wind energy production, special chemicals








C_2022240EN.01001201.xml










22.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 240/12






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10729 – FOWI / MOL / TOHO / HOKURIKU / ORSTED / JERA / SWA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 240/03)
On 16 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 32022M10729. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-520/20: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Silistra, Bulgaria) — DB, LY v Nachalnik na Rayonno upravlenie Silistra pri Oblastna direktsia na Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti — Silistra (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) — Decision 2007/533/JHA — Articles 38 and 39 — Alert on an object sought — Objectives of the alert — Seizure or use as evidence in criminal proceedings — Execution — Measures to be taken and action based on an alert — Surrender of the object seized to the Member State issuing the alert — National legislation not permitting a refusal to execute the alert)
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Schengen Information System, criminal proceedings, evidence, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, seizure of goods








C_2022294EN.01000701.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/7






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Silistra, Bulgaria) — DB, LY v Nachalnik na Rayonno upravlenie Silistra pri Oblastna direktsia na Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti — Silistra
(Case C-520/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) - Decision 2007/533/JHA - Articles 38 and 39 - Alert on an object sought - Objectives of the alert - Seizure or use as evidence in criminal proceedings - Execution - Measures to be taken and action based on an alert - Surrender of the object seized to the Member State issuing the alert - National legislation not permitting a refusal to execute the alert)
(2022/C 294/08)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad — Silistra

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: DB, LY

Defendant: Nachalnik na Rayonno upravlenie Silistra pri Oblastna direktsia na Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti — Silistra

Operative part of the judgment

Article 39 of Council Decision 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007 on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation pursuant to which the competent authorities of the executing Member State are required to execute an alert on an object entered in the second generation Schengen Information System, even though those authorities have doubts regarding the reasons, set out in Article 38(1) of that decision, for the entry of that alert.


(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Case T-358/22: Action brought on 16 June 2022 — PQ v EEAS
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, promotion, staff assessment








C_2022294EN.01004202.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/42






Action brought on 16 June 2022 — PQ v EEAS
(Case T-358/22)
(2022/C 294/59)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: PQ (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 12 in the 2021 promotion exercise;










—


in so far as necessary, cancel the decision to promote the officials included in the list of officials promoted to grade AD 12 in the 2021 promotion exercise;










—


order the European External Action Service to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging breach of the obligation to state reasons. The applicant submits, in that regard, that the absence of any statement of reasons results from the implied rejection of the complaint lodged by the applicant against the contested decision.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of sound administration, Article 45 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’) and the principle of equal treatment, as well as a manifest error of assessment. According to the applicant, the contested decision was adopted in breach of Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and is the result of a manifest error of assessment in so far as, first, the applicant has consistently demonstrated outstanding merit whereas the contested decision places him in a situation of slow career development and, second, the only reproach made in his last staff report taken into account resulted from a manifest error of assessment which was recognised by the appointing authority in its reply of 3 March 2022 to a complaint made by the applicant on 28 October 2021. Finally, the applicant states that the European External Action Service has still not established a system of staff reports and promotions which allows a comparative examination under Article 45 of the Staff Regulations in accordance with the requirements laid down by the case-law.
Case C-572/20: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Köln — Germany) — ACC Silicones Ltd v Bundeszentralamt für Steuern (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of capital — Dividends from ‘free-float’ shares — Reimbursement of tax on income from capital paid by a non-resident company — Conditions — Free movement of capital — Principle of proportionality)
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: capital gains tax, establishment, free movement of capital, principle of proportionality, share, shareholding, tax rebate








C_2022294EN.01000702.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/7






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Köln — Germany) — ACC Silicones Ltd v Bundeszentralamt für Steuern
(Case C-572/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Free movement of capital - Dividends from ‘free-float’ shares - Reimbursement of tax on income from capital paid by a non-resident company - Conditions - Free movement of capital - Principle of proportionality)
(2022/C 294/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ACC Silicones Ltd

Defendant: Bundeszentralamt für Steuern

Operative part of the judgment

Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State’s tax legislation which makes the reimbursement of tax on income from capital paid on dividends from shareholdings below the thresholds laid down by Council Directive 90/435/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, as amended by Council Directive 2003/123/EC of 22 December 2003, received by a company established in another Member State subject to proof that that tax cannot be set off or its set-off carried forward in favour of that company, or in favour of its direct or indirect shareholders, nor deducted by that company as work-related outgoings or an operating cost, whereas such a condition is not provided for as regards reimbursement of tax on income from capital paid by a resident company receiving the same type of income.


(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006 , p. 1)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 233/07
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: air safety, chemical product, chromium, engine, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, metal coating, military aircraft, oxide








C_2022233EN.01003001.xml










16.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 233/30






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 233/07)

Decision granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2022) 3685


9 June 2022


Chromium trioxide
EC No. 215-607-8, CAS No. 1333-82-0


Safran Aircraft Engines, 2, boulevard du Général-Martial-Valin, 75724 Paris Cedex 15, France


REACH/22/25/0


Industrial use of chromium trioxide-based mixtures for the surface treatment of legacy spare parts of military aircraft engines, including safety-critical parts whose failure endangers airworthiness


31 December 2029


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006 , p. 1


(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu).
Case T-83/20: Order of the General Court of 16 June 2022 — bonnanwalt v EUIPO — Bayerischer Rundfunk and Others (tagesschau) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark tagesschau — Partial revocation — Representation by a lawyer who is not an independent third party with regard to the applicant — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, audiovisual programme, broadcasting, registered trade mark, television, trade-mark law








C_2022303EN.01004402.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/44






Order of the General Court of 16 June 2022 — bonnanwalt v EUIPO — Bayerischer Rundfunk and Others (tagesschau)
(Case T-83/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark tagesschau - Partial revocation - Representation by a lawyer who is not an independent third party with regard to the applicant - Inadmissibility)
(2022/C 303/56)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: bonnanwalt Vermögens- und Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: T. Wendt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, acting as Agent)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Bayerischer Rundfunk (Munich, Germany) and the eight other interveners whose names are set out in the annex to the order (represented by: B. Krause, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 December 2019 (Case R 1487/2019-2).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


bonnanwalt Vermögens- und Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 114, 6.4.2020.
Case T-356/22: Action brought on 16 June 2022 — LG Chem v Commission
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: South Korea, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, polymer, rights of the defence, special polymer








C_2022294EN.01004101.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/41






Action brought on 16 June 2022 — LG Chem v Commission
(Case T-356/22)
(2022/C 294/57)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LG Chem, Ltd. (Seoul, South Korea) (represented by: P. Vander Schueren and T. Martin-Brieu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Declare the action admissible;










—


Annul the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/547 of 5 April 2022 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of super absorbent polymers originating in the Republic of Korea (1) (‘Contested Regulation’), as far as it applies to the applicant;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in relation to these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed manifest errors of assessment, breached Article 3(3) 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 (2) (‘basic Regulation’), and violated the applicant’s rights of defence when analysing the price effect of imports from Korea.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed manifest errors of assessment, acted in breach of Articles 3(2), 3(5), 3(6) and 3(7) of the basic Regulation and failed to state reasons by analysing the injury situation of Union producers in a biased manner and by attributing the alleged injury to Korean imports, rather than other known factors.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed manifest errors of assessment, acted in breach of Articles 3(3) and 9(4) of the basic Regulation and violated the applicant’s rights of defence by determining the injury margin based on a simplified product control number, by failing to provide adequate non-confidential summaries of the injury margin calculations and by failing to reflect other known factors of injury in its injury margin determination.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant conducted the investigation in breach of the applicant’s rights of defence and in breach of the right to sound administration.






(1)  OJ 2022, L 107, p. 27.

(2)  OJ 2016, L 176, p. 21.
Case C-229/21: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Port de Bruxelles, Région de Bruxelles-Capitale v Infrabel SA (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Trans-European transport network — Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 — Article 15(1) — Inland waterways transport infrastructures — Inland ports — Obligation of a Member State to connect inland ports with road or rail transport infrastructures — Removal of the connection with one of those two types of transport infrastructure — Conditions)
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: harbour installation, inland waterway transport, maintenance, rail network, road network, trans-European network, transport infrastructure, transport network








C_2022303EN.01000702.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/7






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Port de Bruxelles, Région de Bruxelles-Capitale v Infrabel SA
(Case C-229/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Trans-European transport network - Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 - Article 15(1) - Inland waterways transport infrastructures - Inland ports - Obligation of a Member State to connect inland ports with road or rail transport infrastructures - Removal of the connection with one of those two types of transport infrastructure - Conditions)
(2022/C 303/09)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Port de Bruxelles, Région de Bruxelles-Capitale

Respondent: Infrabel SA

Interveners: FIF-FSI (Fonds d’Infrastructure Ferroviaire) SA, État belge, Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, Port de Bruxelles SA, Lineas SA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU, must be interpreted as meaning that, where an inland port which forms part of the comprehensive network, within the meaning of Article 6(1) and (2) of that regulation, has connections to both road and rail transport infrastructures, it precludes the removal of one of those two types of connection, save in exceptional circumstances. The failure to maintain the connection in question as a result of non-compliance with that provision, or the economic exploitation of the land occupied by those infrastructures, do not constitute such circumstances.


(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2019/1009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 laying down rules on the making available on the market of EU fertilising products and amending Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EC) No 1107/2009 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 (Official Journal of the European Union L 170 of 25 June 2019)
Date: 2022-06-16
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: EC conformity marking, EU environmental policy, fertiliser, fertiliser industry, harmonisation of standards, labelling, market approval, single market








L_2022161EN.01012101.xml










16.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 161/121







Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2019/1009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 laying down rules on the making available on the market of EU fertilising products and amending Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EC) No 1107/2009 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 170 of 25 June 2019
)


On page 87, Annex IV, Part I, Section 1 (APPLICABILITY OF INTERNAL PRODUCTION CONTROL (MODULE A)):
Point 1.1(d) is deleted.