do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-606/22: Action brought on 29 September 2022 — RN v EUIPO
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, allowances and expenses, dependant, education, family benefit, staff regulations (EU)








C_2022482EN.01002301.xml










19.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 482/23






Action brought on 29 September 2022 — RN v EUIPO
(Case T-606/22)
(2022/C 482/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: RN (represented by: S. Moya Felix, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Decision of the Appointing Authority (Executive Director at EUIPO) dated 4 July 2022 concerning the reply to a complaint filed under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulation as regards the lack of payment to the applicant of the education allowance, during certain periods, as well as the lack of recognition of the entitlement of the applicant to receive half of full family allowances (comprising 1/3 of household allowance, dependent child allowance and education allowance corresponding to the applicant’s son) as of a specified date;










—


recognize, as a consequence, the entitlement of the applicant to those family allowances (education allowance during certain periods, as well as half of family allowances, comprising 1/3 of household allowance, dependent child allowance and education allowance corresponding to the applicant’s son) as of a specified date;










—


order the Appointing Authority (EUIPO) to pay all the costs of the dispute before the General Court.





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 an infringement of Article 67 in relation to Article 63 of EU Staff Regulation. (1)

The decision issued by a national court on 28 November 2021 regarding the right of custody was not respected by EUIPO in the sense that the latter considers that 50 % of the family allowances should not be paid to the applicant but only to the other parent, an official of the EUIPO, under very discretional reasons, such as that the decision of the national court does not specify that the applicant’s son is living with both parents during exactly 50 % of time. EUIPO distorted the facts, since usually Family Court decisions are not specifying periods of time, hours or days.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of articles 1, 2, 3 of Annex VII of EU Staff Regulation concerning family allowances.
The applicant is therefore contesting the decision of the EUIPO’s Appointing Authority not only as regards the rejection of the half of the family allowances as of a specified date and on, but also as regards the rejection of the education allowances for certain specified periods.






(1)  Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 1962 P 045, p. 1385).
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 28 September 2022 2022/C 372/02
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022372EN.01000201.xml










29.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 372/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

28 September 2022
(2022/C 372/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


0,9565 




JPY


Japanese yen


138,39 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4368 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90268 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,9194 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9437 




ISK


Iceland króna


139,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,4576 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,650 




HUF


Hungarian forint


411,72 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,8043 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9485 




TRY


Turkish lira


17,7311 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4924 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3157 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


7,5084 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6998 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,3846 




KRW


South Korean won


1 378,84 




ZAR


South African rand


17,2916 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9199 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5313 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 622,96 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4281 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,528 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,687 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,1728 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,5294 




INR


Indian rupee


78,2655 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1861 of 29 September 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Vaca Gallega – Buey Gallego’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Galicia, Spain, beef, designation of origin, fresh meat, labelling, product designation








L_2022259EN.01000101.xml










6.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 259/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1861
of 29 September 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Vaca Gallega – Buey Gallego’ (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Vaca Gallega – Buey Gallego’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Vaca Gallega – Buey Gallego’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Vaca Gallega – Buey Gallego’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.1. – Fresh meat (and offal), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 September 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 229, 14.6.2022, p. 13.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case C-621/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 29 September 2022 — Koninklijke Nederlandse Lawn Tennisbond v Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: commercial transaction, data protection, data-processing law, disclosure of information, personal data








C_2023007EN.01001501.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/15






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 29 September 2022 — Koninklijke Nederlandse Lawn Tennisbond v Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens
(Case C-621/22)
(2023/C 7/18)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Koninklijke Nederlandse Lawn Tennisbond

Respondent: Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens

Questions referred







1.


How should the District Court interpret the term ‘legitimate interest’?










2.


Should the term be interpreted as the respondent interprets it? Are these interests which exclusively pertain to the law, constitute law, are enshrined in a law? Or;










3.


Can any interest be a legitimate interest, provided that interest is not in breach of the law? More specifically: should a purely commercial interest, such as the interest at issue here, the provision of personal data in return for payment without the consent of the data subject concerned, be regarded as a legitimate interest under certain circumstances? If so, what circumstances determine whether a purely commercial interest is a legitimate interest?
Case C-235/21: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 29 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče — Slovenia) — Raiffeisen Leasing, trgovina in leasing d.o.o. v Republika Slovenija (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 203 — Sale-and-lease back agreement — Persons liable for payment of VAT — Possibility of treating a written contractual agreement as an invoice)
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, contract, hiring, invoicing, sale, tax relief








C_2022432EN.01000502.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/5






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 29 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče — Slovenia) — Raiffeisen Leasing, trgovina in leasing d.o.o. v Republika Slovenija
(Case C-235/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 203 - Sale-and-lease back agreement - Persons liable for payment of VAT - Possibility of treating a written contractual agreement as an invoice)
(2022/C 432/06)
Language of the case: Slovenian

Referring court

Vrhovno sodišče

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Raiffeisen Leasing, trgovina in leasing d.o.o.

Defendant: Republika Slovenija

Operative part of the judgment

Article 203 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006, on the common system of value added tax,
must be interpreted as meaning that:
a contractual sale-and-lease back agreement, the conclusion of which was not followed by the issue of an invoice by the parties, may be regarded as an invoice, within the meaning of that provision, where that contractual agreement contains all the information necessary for the tax authorities of a Member State to be able to establish whether the substantive conditions for the right to deduct value added tax are satisfied in the case, which is for the referring court to ascertain.


(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Case C-622/22: Action brought on 29 September 2022 — European Commission v Republic of Malta
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air traffic, air traffic control, data transmission, infringement of EU law, provision of services








C_2022424EN.01003601.xml










7.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/36






Action brought on 29 September 2022 — European Commission v Republic of Malta
(Case C-622/22)
(2022/C 424/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: B. Sasinowska, G. Wilms, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Malta

The applicant claims that the Court should:







—


declare that by not taking the measures necessary to ensure that the ATS provider designated by it complies with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 (1), Republic of Malta has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009; and










—


order the Republic of Malta to pay the costs.





Plea in law and main arguments

The Republic of Malta has been in non-compliance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 of 16 January 2009 laying down requirements on data link services for the single European sky for more than 3 years.


(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 of 16 January 2009 laying down requirements on data link services for the single European sky; OJ 2009, L 13, p. 3.
Corrigendum to Decision No 1/2022 of the EU-Switzerland Joint Committee of 8 September 2022 amending Tables III and IV of Protocol 2 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972, as amended [2022/1635] (Official Journal of the European Union L 245 of 22 September 2022)
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: EU–Switzerland Joint Committee
Subjects: Switzerland, agricultural product, agricultural trade, fixing of prices, protocol to an agreement, reference price, revision of an agreement, trade agreement (EU)








L_2022251EN.01001701.xml










29.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 251/17







Corrigendum to Decision No 1/2022 of the EU-Switzerland Joint Committee of 6 September 2022 amending Tables III and IV of Protocol 2 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972, as amended [2022/1635]

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 245 of 22 September 2022
)


On the cover and on page 66, title, and on page 67, place and date:
for:


                  ‘
                  6 September 2022
                  ’
               

read:


                  ‘
                  8 September 2022
                  ’
Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures 2022/C 372/03
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), organic acid, originating product








C_2022372EN.01000301.xml










29.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 372/3






Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures
(2022/C 372/03)

1.   

As provided for in Article 11(2) 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 (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.


2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.
3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.








4.


This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.









Product


Country(ies) of origin or exportation


Measures


Reference


Date of expiry (3)





Tartaric acid


The People’s Republic of China


Anti-dumping duty


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/921 of 28 June 2018 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of tartaric acid originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council
(OJ L 164, 29.6.2018, p. 14)


30.6.2023










(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column.
Case C-597/20: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ S.A. v Budapest Főváros Kormányhivatala (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Air transport — Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 — Article 16 — Compensation and assistance to passengers — Task of the national body responsible for the enforcement of that regulation — National legislation conferring on that body the power to order an air carrier to pay compensation due to a passenger — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to seek remedy before a tribunal)
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airline, carriage of passengers, carrier, civil aviation, competence of the institution, debt, delegation of power, indemnification, judicial review, traveller








C_2022432EN.01000201.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/2






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ S.A. v Budapest Főváros Kormányhivatala
(Case C-597/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Article 16 - Compensation and assistance to passengers - Task of the national body responsible for the enforcement of that regulation - National legislation conferring on that body the power to order an air carrier to pay compensation due to a passenger - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 47 - Right to seek remedy before a tribunal)
(2022/C 432/02)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Polskie Linie Lotnicze ‘LOT’ S.A.

Defendant: Budapest Főváros Kormányhivatala

Operative part of the judgment

Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91
must be interpreted as meaning that the Member States have the power to authorise the national body responsible for the enforcement of that regulation to compel an air carrier to pay compensation, within the meaning of Article 7 of that regulation, due to passengers under that regulation, where an individual complaint has been made to that national body by a passenger, provided that it is open to that passenger and that air carrier to bring proceedings before the courts.


(1)  OJ C 28, 25.1.2021.
Case C-202/21 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 29 September 2022 — ABLV Bank AS, in liquidation v Single Resolution Board (SRB), European Commission (Appeal — Economic and monetary policy — Banking union — Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 — Single resolution mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms — Single Resolution Fund — Annual contributions — Liquidation of a credit institution — Reimbursement of contributions paid — Pro rata temporis)
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU banking union, bank, fund (EU), liquidation








C_2022432EN.01000501.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/5






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 29 September 2022 — ABLV Bank AS, in liquidation v Single Resolution Board (SRB), European Commission
(Case C-202/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Economic and monetary policy - Banking union - Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 - Single resolution mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms - Single Resolution Fund - Annual contributions - Liquidation of a credit institution - Reimbursement of contributions paid - Pro rata temporis)
(2022/C 432/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: ABLV Bank AS, in liquidation (represented by: O. Behrends, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Single Resolution Board (SRB) (represented by: C.J. Flynn and J. Kerlin, acting as Agents, and by S. Ianc, T. Klupsch, B. Meyring and S. Schelo, Rechtsanwälte), European Commission (represented by: A. Nijenhuis, A. Steiblytė and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders ABLV Bank AS, in liquidation, to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Single Resolution Board (SRB) and the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10696 – ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY / BP EUROPA / LOTOS-AIR BP POLSKA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 384/01
Date: 2022-09-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Poland, aviation fuel, economic concentration, fuel, merger control, provision of services, supply chain, wholesale trade








C_2022384EN.01000101.xml










5.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 384/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10696 – ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY / BP EUROPA / LOTOS-AIR BP POLSKA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 384/01)
On 29 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 32022M10696. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.