do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Information relating to the entry into force of the Protocol between the European Union, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland regarding access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Liechtenstein, Switzerland, agreement (EU), application of EU law, biometrics, database management system, police cooperation, protocol to an agreement, right of asylum








L_2022240EN.01000101.xml










16.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 240/1







Information relating to the entry into force of the Protocol between the European Union, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland regarding access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes

The Protocol between the European Union, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland regarding access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes, signed at Brussels on 27 June 2019
          (1), has entered into force on 1 May 2022, in accordance with Article 4(2) thereof, the procedures necessary for the entry into force having been completed on 28 April 2022.


(1)  
            OJ L 32, 4.2.2020, p. 3.
Modification of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) 2022/C 356/03
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: The Member States
Subjects: Luxembourg, Province of Luxembourg, cross-border cooperation, economic and social cohesion, local authority, regional authority, regional cooperation, regional development








C_2022356EN.01000301.xml










16.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 356/3






Modification of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC)
(2022/C 356/03)

I.   

Name of the EGTC, address and contact point (as it is currently in the EGTC register)
Official name: GECT-Autorité de gestion Programme Interreg V A Grande Région
Registered office: 4, Place de l'Europe, L-1499 Luxembourg
Person responsible (Director): Christiane Fortuin
E-mail address: Christiane.Fortuin@mat.etat.lu
Internet address of the Grouping: www.interreg-gr.eu


II.   

Changes concerning the name, director, registered office, internet address of the EGTC

(skip if not applicable)
Modification of the official name: GECT-Autorité de gestion Programmes Interreg Grande Région
Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union 2022/C 356/02
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, electric vehicle, two-wheeled vehicle








C_2022356EN.01000201.xml










16.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 356/2






Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union
(2022/C 356/02)
Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are hereby amended as follows:

On page 379, the following explanatory note is inserted:








‘8711 60 10




Bicycles, tricycles and quadricycles, with pedal assistance, with an auxiliary electric motor with a continuous rated power not exceeding 250 watts





This subheading includes electric cycles with pedals, which offer different “modes of riding” that can be chosen from: a) pedal assistance with an auxiliary electric motor mode, b) full pedal mode (without any aid of the electric motor) or c) full electric motor mode. The mode can be changed, for example, by a control unit mounted at the handlebar of the bicycle or via a mobile phone application.







8711 60 90




Other





The explanatory note to subheading 8711 60 10 applies, mutatis mutandis, to cycles, with pedal assistance, with an auxiliary electric motor.’



(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1).

(2)  OJ C 119, 29.3.2019, p. 1.
Case C-598/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 16 September 2022 — Società Italiana Imprese Balneari Srl v Comune di Rosignano Marittimo and Others
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: freedom to provide services, maritime transport, principle of proportionality, right of establishment, service concession, transfer of property








C_2022463EN.01001901.xml










5.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 463/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 16 September 2022 — Società Italiana Imprese Balneari Srl v Comune di Rosignano Marittimo and Others
(Case C-598/22)
(2022/C 463/26)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Società Italiana Imprese Balneari Srl

Respondents: Comune di Rosignano Marittimo, Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia del demanio — Direzione regionale Toscana e Umbria, Regione Toscana

Question referred

Do Articles 49 and 56 TFEU and the principles arising from the Laezza judgment (C-375/14), where applicable, preclude the interpretation of a national provision such as Article 49 [of the Italian Shipping Code] as meaning that it results in the transfer without consideration and without compensation, by the concessionaire on expiry of the concession, when that concession has been renewed on an uninterrupted basis, where applicable by virtue of a new measure, of the building works constructed on the State-owned land forming part of the complex of assets organised for the operation of the resort enterprise, since that effect of immediate forfeiture could constitute a restriction that goes beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective actually pursued by the national legislature and is therefore disproportionate to the aim?
Information relating to the entry into force of the Protocol between the European Union, Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway to the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway regarding access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Iceland, Norway, agreement (EU), application of EU law, biometrics, database management system, police cooperation, protocol to an agreement, right of asylum








L_2022240EN.01000201.xml










16.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 240/2







Information relating to the entry into force of the Protocol between the European Union, Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway to the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway regarding access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes

The Protocol between the European Union, Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway to the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland or Norway regarding access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes, signed at Brussels on 24 October 2019
          (1), has entered into force on 1 September 2022, in accordance with Article 4(2) thereof, the procedures necessary for the entry into force having been completed on 9 August 2022.


(1)  
            OJ L 64, 3.3.2020, p. 3.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10846 – CVC FUNDS / VISMA CUSTOM SOLUTIONS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 363/03
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, economic concentration, information technology industry, investment company, merger control, provision of services








C_2022363EN.01000301.xml










22.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10846 – CVC FUNDS / VISMA CUSTOM SOLUTIONS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 363/03)
On 16 September 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 32022M10846. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10889 – CNP / CVA) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 356/04
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Italy, economic concentration, insurance company, life assurance, merger control








C_2022356EN.01000401.xml










16.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 356/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10889 – CNP / CVA)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 356/04)

1.   
On 9 September 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:






—


CNP Assurances S.A. (‘CNP’, France), controlled by Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations (‘CDC’, France),










—


CNP Vita Assicura S.p.A. (‘CVA’, Italy), jointly controlled by CNP and UniCredit S.p.A. (‘UniCredit’, Italy).




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


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






—


CNP develops, provides and manages insurance products globally. In Italy, CNP is mainly active in the provision of life insurance products,










—


CVA is an insurance company currently jointly controlled by CNP and UniCredit that provides life insurance products in Italy.






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.10889 – CNP / CVA
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 C-597/22 P: Appeal brought on 16 September 2022 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 6 July 2022 in Case T-408/21, HB v European Commission
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Ukraine, award of contract, claim, provision of services, public procurement, services contract, technical cooperation








C_2023024EN.01002003.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/20






Appeal brought on 16 September 2022 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 6 July 2022 in Case T-408/21, HB v European Commission
(Case C-597/22 P)
(2023/C 24/29)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz, J. Estrada de Solà and B. Araujo Arce, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: HB (represented by: L. Levi, avocate)

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 6 July 2022 in Case T-408/21 HB v Commission, in so far as it annuls Commission Decisions C(2021) 3339 final of 5 May 2021 and C(2021) 3340 final of 5 May 2021;










—


refer the case back to the General Court for a decision on the substance in relation to the application for annulment;










—


order HB to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its appeal, the Commission relies on a single plea in law, alleging an error of law.
According to the Commission, the General Court erred in considering that Decisions C(2019) 7318 final and C(2019) 7319 were contractual.
Consequently, the incorrect characterisation of those two claims as contractual includes, in accordance with the case-law ADR (C-584/17), the wrongful annulment of Commission Decisions C(2021) 3339 final of 5 May 2021 and C(2021) 3340 final of 5 May 2021, which are the subject of the present case.
Case T-578/22: Action brought on 16 September 2022 — EDPS v Parliament and Council
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Europol, criminal procedure, data protection, operation of the Institutions, personal data, principle of legal certainty, retroactivity of a law, right of action, separation of powers








C_2022424EN.01004501.xml










7.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/45






Action brought on 16 September 2022 — EDPS v Parliament and Council
(Case T-578/22)
(2022/C 424/58)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Data Protection Supervisor (represented by: D. Nardi, T. Zerdick, A. Buchta and F. Coudert, acting as Agents)

Defendants: European Parliament, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Article 74a and Article 74b of Regulation 2016/794 (1) as amended by Regulation 2022/991 (2);










—


condemn the defendants to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law, alleging violation of the independence and powers of the applicant as a supervisory authority because of the infringement of the principle of legal certainty and of the principle of non-retroactivity of legal acts. The applicant alleges infringement of Article 8(3) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 55 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 (3) read in conjunction with Article 43(1) and (3)(e) of Regulation (EU) 2016/794 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2022/991.
The applicant claims that his standing to bring an action for annulment under Article 263 TFEU is justified by the need to be able to dispose of a judicial remedy to defend his institutional prerogatives, in particular his independence as a supervisory authority under Article 8(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the institutional balance between the role of supervisory authorities and the role of the legislator.
Alternatively, he claims being directly and individually concerned by the contested provisions, which he has a clear and actual interest to have annulled.


(1)  Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968 (OJ 2016 L 135, p. 53).

(2)  Regulation (EU) 2022/991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2022 amending Regulation (EU) 2016/794, as regards Europol’s cooperation with private parties, the processing of personal data by Europol in support of criminal investigations, and Europol’s role in research and innovation (OJ 2022 L 169, p. 1).

(3)  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 (OJ 2018 L 295, p. 39).
Case C-639/21: Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 16 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — PB v Geos SAS, Geos International Consulting Limited
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, labour dispute, legal domicile, private international law








C_2023024EN.01003202.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/32






Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 16 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — PB v Geos SAS, Geos International Consulting Limited
(Case C-639/21) (1)

(2023/C 24/44)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Case C-605/22 P: Appeal brought on 16 September 2022 by Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 29 June 2022 in Case T-306/20, Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González v EUIPO — Irlande et Ornua (La Irlandesa 1943)
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, fats, foodstuff, meat, milk product, processed food product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023173EN.01001001.xml










15.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 173/10






Appeal brought on 16 September 2022 by Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 29 June 2022 in Case T-306/20, Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González v EUIPO — Irlande et Ornua (La Irlandesa 1943)
(Case C-605/22 P)
(2023/C 173/13)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA (represented by: J. García Domínguez, abogado)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Irlande et Ornua Co-operative Ltd
By order of 8 March 2023, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González should bear its own costs.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 15 September 2022 2022/C 356/01
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022356EN.01000101.xml










16.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 356/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

15 September 2022
(2022/C 356/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


0,9992 




JPY


Japanese yen


143,43 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4366 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86934 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6900 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9572 




ISK


Iceland króna


138,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1203 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,518 




HUF


Hungarian forint


407,15 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,7273 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9238 




TRY


Turkish lira


18,2477 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4853 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3172 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


7,8423 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6689 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4062 




KRW


South Korean won


1 397,18 




ZAR


South African rand


17,5283 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9852 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5258 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 925,35 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5314 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,258 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,816 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,1837 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,0021 




INR


Indian rupee


79,7119 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-599/22: Action brought on 16 September 2022 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic
Date: 2022-09-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air traffic, air traffic control, data transmission, infringement of EU law, provision of services








C_2022424EN.01003401.xml










7.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/34






Action brought on 16 September 2022 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic
(Case C-599/22)
(2022/C 424/45)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, B. Sasinowska and G. Wilms, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:






—


declare that, by failing to take the measures necessary to ensure that its designated air traffic service (ATS) provider complies with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009, (1) the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(3) TEU, read in conjunction with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009;










—


order the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Hellenic Republic has taken over three years to comply with Regulation No 29/2009 as regards ensuring the provision of data link services for the single European sky.


(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 of 16 January 2009 laying down requirements on data link services for the single European sky (Text with EEA relevance), OJ 2009 L 13, p. 3.