do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-470/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrchní soud v Praze (Czech Republic) lodged on 14 July 2022 — Česká národní skupina Mezinárodní federace hudebního průmyslu, z. s. v I&Q GROUP, spol. s r.o., Hellspy SE
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet site, copyright, electronic commerce, liability, provision of services, restriction on competition








C_2022418EN.01001201.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrchní soud v Praze (Czech Republic) lodged on 14 July 2022 — Česká národní skupina Mezinárodní federace hudebního průmyslu, z. s. v I&Q GROUP, spol. s r.o., Hellspy SE
(Case C-470/22)
(2022/C 418/15)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Vrchní soud v Praze

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Česká národní skupina Mezinárodní federace hudebního průmyslu, z. s.

Defendants: I&Q GROUP, spol. s r.o., Hellspy SE

Questions referred







1.


Does the spirit and purpose of Directive 2000/31/EC (1) preclude Article 14(1) thereof from being interpreted as meaning that the liability of a provider of an information gathering (hosting) service for the contents of such service includes liability for the manner in which such service is provided?










2.


Does the spirit and purpose of Directive 2000/31/EC allow for Article 14(1) thereof to be interpreted as meaning that the rules for limiting the liability of a provider of an information gathering (hosting) service set out therein cannot exclude the private-law liability of such a provider for the choice of a particular business model for the provision of the service, even if that model has the potential to benefit from copyright infringement?










3.


Does the liability waiver set out in Article 14(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC apply to the provider of an information gathering service, and selection from it by means of a search engine, in terms of liability for the manner of its provision, if that manner encourages the service recipient to store the information on it without the consent of the copyright holders, but without the active participation of the service provider in the copyright infringement?






(1)  Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1).
Case C-572/21: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 July 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — CC v VO (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility — Parental responsibility — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 8(1) and Article 61(a) — General jurisdiction — Perpetuatio fori principle — Transfer, during the proceedings, of the habitual residence of a child from a Member State of the European Union to a third State that is party to the 1996 Hague Convention)
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: child, international convention, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, parental responsibility, residence, third country








C_2022359EN.01001002.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/10






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 July 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — CC v VO
(Case C-572/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility - Parental responsibility - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Article 8(1) and Article 61(a) - General jurisdiction - Perpetuatio fori principle - Transfer, during the proceedings, of the habitual residence of a child from a Member State of the European Union to a third State that is party to the 1996 Hague Convention)
(2022/C 359/12)
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: CC

Defendant: VO

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, read in conjunction with Article 61(a) of that regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that a court of a Member State that is hearing a dispute relating to parental responsibility does not retain jurisdiction to rule on that dispute under Article 8(1) of that regulation where the habitual residence of the child in question has been lawfully transferred, during the proceedings, to the territory of a third State that is a party to the Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children, signed at The Hague on 19 October 1996.


(1)  OJ C 481, 29.11.2021.
State aid – Decision to raise no objections 2022/C 271/07
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, cultural event, epidemic








C_2022271EN.01000801.xml










14.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/8






State aid – Decision to raise no objections
(2022/C 271/07)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:






Date of adoption of the decision


1 March 2022




Case No


88256




Decision No


061/22/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


COVID-19 amendments to the compensation scheme for cancelled and downscaled cultural events




Legal basis


A regulation on a temporary compensation scheme for cancelled, closed or downscaled cultural events in the period 1 November 2021 to 28 February 2022 as a consequence of the COVID-19 outbreak




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


NOK 480 million




Intensity


70 %




Duration


Until 30 June 2022




Economic sectors


Culture sector




Name and address of the granting authority







Lotteri- og stiftelsestilsynet




P.O. Box 800




N-6805 Førde




NORWAY








The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Internet:
http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/
Case C-401/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 July 2022 — Romania v European Commission (Appeal — Cohesion Fund and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) — Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 — Co-financing rate applicable — Amendment of the rate between the submission of the final application for an interim payment and the acceptance of the accounts — Principle that accounts relate to a specific year and principle of non-retroactivity)
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, European Regional Development Fund, co-financing, operational programme, principle of additionality, retroactivity of a law, transport infrastructure








C_2022359EN.01000902.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/9






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 July 2022 — Romania v European Commission
(Case C-401/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Cohesion Fund and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) - Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 - Co-financing rate applicable - Amendment of the rate between the submission of the final application for an interim payment and the acceptance of the accounts - Principle that accounts relate to a specific year and principle of non-retroactivity)
(2022/C 359/10)
Language of the case: Romanian

Parties


Appellant: Romania (represented by: L.-E. Baţagoi and E. Gane, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Armenia and S. Pardo Quintillán, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Romania to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.
Case C-36/21: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 July 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven — Netherlands) — Sense Visuele Communicatie en Handel vof (also trading under the name De Scharrelderij) v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common agricultural policy — Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 — Direct support schemes — Common rules — Article 30(6) and Article 50(2) — Application for payment entitlements from the national reserve for young farmers — National administrative authority which has given incorrect information about the classification of a person as a ‘young farmer’ — Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations — Action seeking reparation for loss or harm based on the failure to comply with the national law principle of legitimate expectations)
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to agriculture, common agricultural policy, indemnification, young farmer








C_2022340EN.01001201.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/12






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 July 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven — Netherlands) — Sense Visuele Communicatie en Handel vof (also trading under the name De Scharrelderij) v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit
(Case C-36/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common agricultural policy - Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 - Direct support schemes - Common rules - Article 30(6) and Article 50(2) - Application for payment entitlements from the national reserve for young farmers - National administrative authority which has given incorrect information about the classification of a person as a ‘young farmer’ - Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations - Action seeking reparation for loss or harm based on the failure to comply with the national law principle of legitimate expectations)
(2022/C 340/12)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Sense Visuele Communicatie en Handel vof (also trading under the name De Scharrelderij)

Defendant: Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit

Operative part of the judgment

EU law and, in particular, the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations must be interpreted as not precluding an injured party from obtaining, by virtue of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations recognised by national law and solely on the basis of that law, compensation for loss or harm resulting from a misinterpretation by a national authority of an unambiguous provision of EU law, provided that that compensation is not equivalent to the grant of an advantage contrary to EU law, that it is not borne by the EU budget and that it is not such as to give rise to distortions of competition between Member States.


(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Case T-157/22: Order of the General Court of 14 July 2022 — Dehaen v EUIPO — National Geographic Society (NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC)
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, personal effects, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2022340EN.01005801.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/58






Order of the General Court of 14 July 2022 — Dehaen v EUIPO — National Geographic Society (NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC)
(Case T-157/22) (1)

(2022/C 340/80)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 207, 23.5.2022.
Case C-479/22 P: Appeal brought on 14 July 2022 by OC against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 4 May 2022 in Case T-384/20, OC v Commission
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, confidentiality, data protection, dissemination of information, fundamental rights, indemnification, personal data, press release, rights of the defence








C_2022340EN.01002501.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/25






Appeal brought on 14 July 2022 by OC against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 4 May 2022 in Case T-384/20, OC v Commission
(Case C-479/22 P)
(2022/C 340/32)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellant: OC (represented by: I. Ktenidis, dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

Appeal seeking to have set aside the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 May 2022 in Case T-384/20, OC v European Commission (ECLI:EU:T:2022:273)
The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside in its entirety the judgment under appeal;










—


give a final judgment in the dispute;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of the appeal proceedings and of the proceedings before the General Court.





Grounds of appeal and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant raises the following three grounds:






1.



First ground: Incorrect interpretation of Article 3(1) of Regulation 2018/1725 (1) regarding, first, the concept of ‘identifiable’ physical person and, second, the concept of means that are reasonably likely to be used to identify a natural person, as well as distortion of the clear sense of the evidence relating to the identification of the appellant by a specific person.










2.



Second ground: Incorrect interpretation of Article 9(1) of Regulation No 883/2013 (2) and of Article 48(1) of the Charter, read in conjunction with Article 6(2) of the ECHR, regarding the scope of the presumption of innocence.










3.



Third ground: Distortion of the clear sense of the evidence relating to the breach of the right to good administration under Article 41 of the Charter.






(1)  Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC (Text with EEA relevance), OJ 2018 L 295, p. 39.

(2)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999, OJ 2013 L 248, p. 1.
Notice of open competition 2022/C 271/08
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: Union delegation, administrator, competition (EU), recruitment








C_2022271EN.01000901.xml










14.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/9






NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
(2022/C 271/08)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:

EPSO/AST/153/22 – Heads of administration (AST 4) in EU Delegations

The competition notice is published in 24 languages in 
Official Journal of the European Union
C 271 A of 14 July 2022
.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: https://epso.europa.eu/
Case T-158/22: Order of the General Court of 14 July 2022 — Dehaen v EUIPO — National Geographic Society (NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC)
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business management, catering industry, clothing, footwear industry, hotel industry, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_2022340EN.01005802.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/58






Order of the General Court of 14 July 2022 — Dehaen v EUIPO — National Geographic Society (NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC)
(Case T-158/22) (1)

(2022/C 340/81)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 207, 23.5.2022.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10747 – BHC / DUSSUR / BAKER PETROLITE SAUDI COMPANY JV) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 271/12
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy technology, investment company, merger control, parent company








C_2022271EN.01001601.xml










14.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 271/16






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10747 – BHC / DUSSUR / BAKER PETROLITE SAUDI COMPANY JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 271/12)

1.   
On 8 July 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:






—


Baker Hughes Company (‘BHC’) (USA),










—


Saudi Arabian Industrial Investments Company JSC (‘Dussur’), controlled by Saudi Aramco (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund (‘PIF’),










—


Baker Petrolite Saudi Company Limited (‘Proposed JV’) (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia).




BHC and Dussur will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the Proposed JV.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.


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






—


BHC is the parent entity of an energy technology group of companies with a diverse portfolio of equipement and service capabilities that span the energy and industrial value chain operating in more than 120 countries,










—


Dussur is a strategic investment company.






3.   

The Proposed JV will be active in the specialty chemicals business in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.



4.   
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.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


5.   
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.10747 – BHC / DUSSUR / BAKER PETROLITE SAUDI COMPANY JV
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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Joined Cases C-106/19 and C-232/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 July 2022 — Italian Republic (C-106/19), Comune di Milano (C-232/19) v Council of the European Union, European Parliament (Action for annulment — Law governing the institutions — Regulation (EU) 2018/1718 — Location of the seat of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in Amsterdam (Netherlands) — Article 263 TFEU — Admissibility — Interest in bringing proceedings — Locus standi — Direct and individual concern — Decision adopted by the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States in the margins of a Council meeting in order to determine the location of the seat of an EU agency — Absence of binding effects in the EU legal order — Prerogatives of the European Parliament)
Date: 2022-07-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Medicines Agency, Netherlands, North Holland, powers of the institutions (EU), seat of institution








C_2022340EN.01000301.xml










5.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/3






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 July 2022 — Italian Republic (C-106/19), Comune di Milano (C-232/19) v Council of the European Union, European Parliament
(Joined Cases C-106/19 and C-232/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Law governing the institutions - Regulation (EU) 2018/1718 - Location of the seat of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in Amsterdam (Netherlands) - Article 263 TFEU - Admissibility - Interest in bringing proceedings - Locus standi - Direct and individual concern - Decision adopted by the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States in the margins of a Council meeting in order to determine the location of the seat of an EU agency - Absence of binding effects in the EU legal order - Prerogatives of the European Parliament)
(2022/C 340/03)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicants: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, Agent, and by C. Colelli, S. Fiorentino and G. Galluzzo, avvocati dello Stato) (C-106/19), Comune di Milano (represented by: J. Alberti, M. Condinanzi, A. Neri and F. Sciaudone, avvocati) (C-232/19)

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, J. Bauerschmidt, F. Florindo Gijón and E. Rebasti, Agents), European Parliament (represented by: I. Anagnostopoulou, A. Tamás and L. Visaggio, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendants: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman and J. Langer, Agents), European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann, D. Nardi and P.J.O. Van Nuffel, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders the Italian Republic, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament to bear their own costs in Case C-106/19;










3.


Orders the Comune di Milano, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament to bear their own costs in Case C-232/19;










4.


Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the European Commission to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.