do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-477/22: Action brought on 1 August 2022 — Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Others
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, Spain, bank, bank resolution, financial solvency, indemnification, operation of the Institutions, price of securities, public statement, shareholder








C_2022398EN.01003002.xml










17.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/30






Action brought on 1 August 2022 — Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Others
(Case T-477/22)
(2022/C 398/37)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Calatrava Real State 2015, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: B. Fernández García, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission, European Central Bank, Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the European Union has incurred non-contractual liability for the unlawful and negligent conduct of the European Commission, the Single Resolution Board and the European Central Bank in respect of the facts set out in the application;










—


order the European Union to compensate the applicant in the amount of EUR 713 320,65, corresponding to the calculations and the quantification set out in the expert report annexed to the application, plus statutory interest, and order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea, alleging that the Single Resolution Board acted unlawfully by making alarmist public statements and engaging in actions (in particular leaks) constituting irresponsible conduct, which led to the immediate collapse in the share price of Banco Popular Español, S.A. and precipitated its resolution.










2.


Second plea, alleging that the Single Resolution Board and the European Commission acted negligently by adopting and approving the resolution of Banco Popular Español, S.A. without having verified and confirmed, in accordance with EU legislation, whether the requirements and preconditions for applying that resolution mechanism had been met and by failing — once that mechanism was agreed upon — to comply with EU legislation on the resolution procedure or with the rights of the shareholders and/or holders of securities in the bank.










3.


Third plea, alleging that the European Central Bank failed to exercise care in monitoring, supervising, forecasting, regulating and establishing the necessary mechanisms to ensure the liquidity of Banco Popular Español, S.A. and to prevent its resolution.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10824 – BAIN CAPITAL / HOUSE OF HR) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 293/08
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, employment service, investment company, merger control, personnel administration








C_2022293EN.01000901.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/9






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10824 – BAIN CAPITAL / HOUSE OF HR)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 293/08)

1.   
On 25 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:






—


Bain Capital Investors, L.L.C. (‘Bain Capital’, United States),










—


House of HR NV (‘House of HR’, Belgium).




Bain Capital will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of House of HR.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


Bain Capital: private equity investment firm that invests in companies across Europe, the Americas and the Asia-Pacific region in a number of industries, including information technology, healthcare, retail and consumer products, communications, financial services and industrial/manufacturing,










—


House of HR: provides human resources solutions and services to its customers which are active across a variety of sectors in Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain.






3.   
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.


4.   
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.10824 – BAIN CAPITAL / HOUSE OF HR
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.
Case T-742/21: Order of the General Court of 1 August 2022 — Preventicus v EUIPO (NIGHTWATCH) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, medical diagnosis, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2022398EN.01002502.xml










17.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/25






Order of the General Court of 1 August 2022 — Preventicus v EUIPO (NIGHTWATCH)
(Case T-742/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 398/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Preventicus GmbH (Jena, Germany) (represented by: J. Zecher, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, Agent)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Preventicus GmbH, seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 9 September 2021 (Case R 1241/2020-4).

Operative part of the order







1.


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










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Preventicus GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Case C-294/21: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg — Luxembourg) — État luxembourgeois, Administration de l’enregistrement, des domaines et de la TVA v Navitours Sàrl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC — Article 2(1) — Scope — Taxable transactions — Article 9(2)(b) — Place where transport services are supplied — Tourist trips on the Moselle — River subject to condominium status)
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, Luxembourg, VAT, basis of tax assessment, carriage of passengers, establishment, provision of services, river tourism, tax collection, watercourse








C_2022408EN.01001901.xml










24.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/19






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg — Luxembourg) — État luxembourgeois, Administration de l’enregistrement, des domaines et de la TVA v Navitours Sàrl
(Case C-294/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC - Article 2(1) - Scope - Taxable transactions - Article 9(2)(b) - Place where transport services are supplied - Tourist trips on the Moselle - River subject to condominium status)
(2022/C 408/21)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: État luxembourgeois, Administration de l’enregistrement, des domaines et de la TVA

Respondent: Navitours Sàrl

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 2(1) and 9(2)(b) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991,
must be interpreted as meaning:
a Member State must tax passenger transport performed, by a service transport provider established in that Member State, within a territory which, pursuant to an international treaty concluded between that Member State and another Member State, constitutes a joint territory under joint sovereignty of those two Member states and which is not subject to any exception provided for by EU law, provided that those services have not already been taxed by that other Member State. The taxation, by one of the Member States, of those services prevents the other Member State from taxing them in turn, without prejudice to the possibility for those two Member States to regulate in another way the taxation of services performed within that territory, inter alia by means of an agreement, provided that non-taxation and double taxation is avoided.


(1)  
            OJ C 191, 10.5.2022.
Case T-474/22: Action brought on 1 August 2022 — Imasa, Ingeniería y Proyectos v Commission and Others
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, Spain, bank, bank resolution, financial solvency, indemnification, operation of the Institutions, price of securities, public statement, shareholder








C_2022398EN.01002901.xml










17.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/29






Action brought on 1 August 2022 — Imasa, Ingeniería y Proyectos v Commission and Others
(Case T-474/22)
(2022/C 398/35)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Imasa, Ingeniería y Proyectos, SA (Oviedo, Spain) (represented by: J. Álvarez González, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission, European Central Bank, Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the European Union has incurred non-contractual liability for the unlawful and negligent conduct of the European Commission, the Single Resolution Board and the European Central Bank in respect of the facts set out in the application;










—


order the European Union to compensate the applicant in the amount of EUR 186 195,66, corresponding to the calculations and the quantification set out in the expert report annexed to the application, plus statutory interest, and order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea, alleging that the Single Resolution Board acted unlawfully by making alarmist public statements and engaging in actions (in particular leaks) constituting irresponsible conduct, which led to the immediate collapse in the share price of Banco Popular Español, S.A. and precipitated its resolution.










2.


Second plea, alleging that the Single Resolution Board and the European Commission acted negligently by adopting and approving the resolution of Banco Popular Español, S.A. without having verified and confirmed, in accordance with EU legislation, whether the requirements and preconditions for applying that resolution mechanism had been met and by failing — once that mechanism was agreed upon — to comply with EU legislation on the resolution procedure or with the rights of the shareholders and/or holders of securities in the bank.










3.


Third plea, alleging that the European Central Bank failed to exercise care in monitoring, supervising, forecasting, regulating and establishing the necessary mechanisms to ensure the liquidity of Banco Popular Español, S.A. and to prevent its resolution.
Case C-310/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 August 2022 — Aquind Ltd, Aquind Energy Sàrl, Aquind SAS v European Commission, Kingdom of Spain, Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic (Appeal — Energy — Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 — Trans-European energy infrastructure — Projects of common interest of the European Union — Article 3(4) and Article 16 — Delegation of power to the European Commission — Article 290 TFEU — Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/389 — Amendment of the list of projects of common interest of the Union — Act adopted by the Commission — Right of objection of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union — Time limit — Nature of the act before the expiry of that period)
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU energy policy, delegated regulation, energy grid, limitation of legal proceedings, powers of the institutions (EU), project of common interest, trans-European network, transfer of competence








C_2022359EN.01000801.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/8






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 August 2022 — Aquind Ltd, Aquind Energy Sàrl, Aquind SAS v European Commission, Kingdom of Spain, Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic
(Case C-310/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Energy - Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 - Trans-European energy infrastructure - Projects of common interest of the European Union - Article 3(4) and Article 16 - Delegation of power to the European Commission - Article 290 TFEU - Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/389 - Amendment of the list of projects of common interest of the Union - Act adopted by the Commission - Right of objection of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union - Time limit - Nature of the act before the expiry of that period)
(2022/C 359/08)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Aquind Ltd, Aquind Energy Sàrl, Aquind SAS (represented by: C. Davis and S. Goldberg, Solicitors, and by E. White, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: O. Beynet and B. De-Meester, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M.J. Ruiz Sánchez, acting as Agent), Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Aquind Ltd, Aquind Energy Sàrl and Aquind SAS to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 320, 9.8.2021.
Case C-422/21: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Ministero dell’Interno v TO (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Applicants for international protection — Directive 2013/33/EU — Article 20(4) and (5) — Seriously violent behaviour — Member States’ right to determine the sanctions applicable — Scope — Withdrawal of material reception conditions)
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU migration policy, asylum seeker, foreign national, international protection, physical aggression, principle of proportionality, right of asylum, stateless person








C_2022408EN.01002201.xml










24.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/22






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Ministero dell’Interno v TO
(Case C-422/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Applicants for international protection - Directive 2013/33/EU - Article 20(4) and (5) - Seriously violent behaviour - Member States’ right to determine the sanctions applicable - Scope - Withdrawal of material reception conditions)
(2022/C 408/25)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Ministero dell’Interno

Respondent: TO

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 20(4) of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection must be interpreted as applying to seriously violent behaviour engaged in outside an accommodation centre.










2.


Article 20(4) and (5) of Directive 2013/33 must be interpreted as precluding the imposition, on an applicant for international protection who has engaged in seriously violent behaviour against public officials, of a sanction consisting in the withdrawal of material reception conditions, within the meaning of Article 2(f) and (g) of that directive, relating to housing, food or clothing, in so far as it would have the effect of depriving the applicant of the possibility of meeting his or her most basic needs The imposition of other sanctions under Article 20(4) of the directive must, in all circumstances, comply with the conditions laid down in Article 20(5) thereof, including those concerning the principle of proportionality and respect for human dignity.






(1)  
            OJ C 368, 13.9.2021.
Conduct of judicial activity between 1 and 15 September 2022 2022/C 293/07
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: General Court (EU), appointment of members, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








C_2022293EN.01000801.xml










1.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/8






Conduct of judicial activity between 1 and 15 September 2022
(2022/C 293/07)
Whereas two judges of the General Court entered into office on 6 July 2022, the General Court, at its Plenary Meeting of the same date, took note of the fact that the taking of the oath before the Court of Justice by the new Judges of the General Court in the context of the three-yearly renewal will take place on 15 September 2022 and, consequently, confirms that, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 5 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, until the new Judges of the General Court take up their duties:






—


the President of the GenDeral Court will be Mr van der Woude;










—


the Vice-President of the General Court will be Mr Papasavvas;










—


the Presidents of the Chambers of five and three Judges will be Mr Kanninen, Ms Tomljenović, Mr Gervasoni, Mr Spielmann, Ms Marcoulli, Mr da Silva Passos, Mr Svenningsen, Ms Costeira, Mr Kornezov, Mr De Baere;










—


the decision on the formation of Chambers of 30 September 2019, as most recently amended by the decision of 6 July 2022 (1), the decision of 4 October 2019 on the assignment of Judges to Chambers, as most recently amended by the decision of 6 July 2022 (2), the decision of 10 April 2019 on the composition of the Grand Chamber (3), the decision of 10 July 2019 on the designation of a Judge to replace a Judge who is prevented from acting (4) and the decision of 4 October 2019 on the criteria for the assignment of cases to Chambers (5) will continue to apply.






(1)  OJ C 284, 25.7.2022, p. 2.

(2)  OJ C 284, 25.7.2022, p. 2.

(3)  OJ C 172, 20.5.2019, p. 2.

(4)  OJ C 263, 5.8.2019, p. 2.

(5)  OJ C 372, 4.11.2019, p. 2.
Case C-319/21: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Venezia — Italy) — Agecontrol SpA v ZR, Lidl Italia Srl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Agriculture — Common organisation of the markets — Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 — Packed fresh fruit and vegetables — Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 — Conformity check — Transport to a point of sale of the same company — Accompanying document — Indication of country of origin)
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approval, carriage of goods, common organisation of markets, designation of origin, fresh fruit, fresh vegetable, invoicing, labelling, market approval, originating product, packaged product








C_2022408EN.01002001.xml










24.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/20






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Venezia — Italy) — Agecontrol SpA v ZR, Lidl Italia Srl
(Case C-319/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 - Packed fresh fruit and vegetables - Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 - Conformity check - Transport to a point of sale of the same company - Accompanying document - Indication of country of origin)
(2022/C 408/22)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte d’appello di Venezia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Agecontrol SpA

Defendant: ZR, Lidl Italia Srl

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(4) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors, read in the light of Article 8 of that regulation and of Articles 113 and 113a of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 361/2008 of 14 April 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that the check for conformity with the marketing standards for products in the fruit and vegetables sector does not require the holder of those products to issue an accompanying document. However, where that holder issues such a document, it must, at all stages of the marketing of those products, indicate the name and the country of origin of those products, irrespective of the fact that the external information particulars required by Implementing Regulation No 543/2011 already appear, obviously and indelibly, on one side of their packaging, on a notice placed in an obvious position inside the means of transport by which they are transported and on the invoices issued by the supplier of those products.


(1)  
            OJ C 310, 2.8.2021.
Case C-447/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 1 August 2022 — Petrus Kerstens v European Commission (Appeal — Civil Service — Disciplinary proceedings — Requests for assistance — Rejection — Notification of decisions by electronic means — Action for annulment — Period allowed for commencing proceedings — Point from which time starts to run — Action brought out of time)
Date: 2022-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European civil service, disciplinary proceedings, legal aid, limitation of legal proceedings








C_2022359EN.01001001.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/10






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 1 August 2022 — Petrus Kerstens v European Commission
(Case C-447/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil Service - Disciplinary proceedings - Requests for assistance - Rejection - Notification of decisions by electronic means - Action for annulment - Period allowed for commencing proceedings - Point from which time starts to run - Action brought out of time)
(2022/C 359/11)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Petrus Kerstens (represented by: C. Mourato, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. S. Bohr, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr Petrus Kerstens to bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 431, 25.10.2021.