do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Corrigendum to Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/411 of 10 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (Official Journal of the European Union L 84 of 11 March 2022)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, natural person, territorial dispute, territorial law








L_2022271EN.01002301.xml










19.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 271/23







Corrigendum to Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/411 of 10 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 84 of 11 March 2022
)


On page 35, table column ‘Identifying information’, row 131:
for:


                  ‘DOB: 10.5.1980 or 21.10.1983
                  ’,

read:


                  ‘DOB: 21.10.1983
                  ’.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10615 – BOOKING HOLDINGS / ETRAVELI GROUP) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 402/07
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, tourism, vehicle rental








C_2022402EN.01001101.xml










19.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/11






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10615 – BOOKING HOLDINGS / ETRAVELI GROUP)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 402/07)

1.   
On 10 October 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Booking Holdings Inc (‘Booking’, US),










—


Flugo Group Holdings AB (‘Flugo’, Sweden).




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


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






—


Booking: public, global travel company active in the supply of online travel agency (‘OTA’) and metasearch (‘MSS’) services primarily for accommodations, whilst also providing services for flights, car rental and activities. Booking’s core brands include Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda, KAYAK, Rentalcars.com and OpenTable.










—


Flugo: offers under the trading name ‘eTraveli’ OTA services almost exclusively focussed on the sale of flights, whilst it is also active, to a limited extent, in the accommodation and car rental sales (ETG is also active in the supply of airline content distribution services, via TripStack. Flugo’s MSS activities operated under the Flygresor brand do not form part of the proposed concentration.






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.



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.10615 – BOOKING HOLDINGS / ETRAVELI GROUP
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’).
Case T-850/19: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Greece v Commission (State aid — Activities linked to the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products — State aid schemes established by Greece in the form of interest subsidies and State guarantees on existing loans and new loans in order to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences — Decision declaring the aid schemes incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering recovery of the aid paid — Aid limited to affected geographical areas — Advantage — Selective nature — Principle of sound administration — Duration of the procedure — Legitimate expectation — Limitation period — Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, aid to agriculture, aid to disaster victims, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, credit guarantee, fire, interest rate subsidy, limitation of legal proceedings, reimbursement of aid








C_2022482EN.01001601.xml










19.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 482/16






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Greece v Commission
(Case T-850/19) (1)

(State aid - Activities linked to the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products - State aid schemes established by Greece in the form of interest subsidies and State guarantees on existing loans and new loans in order to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences - Decision declaring the aid schemes incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering recovery of the aid paid - Aid limited to affected geographical areas - Advantage - Selective nature - Principle of sound administration - Duration of the procedure - Legitimate expectation - Limitation period - Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589)
(2022/C 482/23)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: E. Tsaousi, E. Leftheriotou and A.-V. Vasilopoulou, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and T. Ramopoulos, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the Hellenic Republic seeks the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2020/394 of 7 October 2019 concerning the measures SA.39119 (2016/C) (ex 2015/NN) (ex 2014/CP) implemented by the Hellenic Republic in the form of interest subsidies and guarantees linked to the fires of 2007 (the present decision covers only the agricultural sector) (OJ 2020 L 76, p. 4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Case T-624/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — MV v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Recruitment — Notice of open competition EPSO/AD/364/19 (AD 7) — Decision of the Selection Board to exclude the applicant from the next stage of the competition — Competition eligibility requirements — Insufficient professional experience — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Rules on languages — Equal treatment)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), damages, equal treatment, language skills, professional experience








C_2023007EN.01002301.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/23






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — MV v Commission
(Case T-624/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Notice of open competition EPSO/AD/364/19 (AD 7) - Decision of the Selection Board to exclude the applicant from the next stage of the competition - Competition eligibility requirements - Insufficient professional experience - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Rules on languages - Equal treatment)
(2023/C 7/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: MV (represented by G. Pandey, D. Rovetta and V. Villante, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by T. Lilamand and M. Brauhoff, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by M. Bauer and M. Alver, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the competition selection board of 29 October 2019 rejecting his request for review of the decision of 5 June 2019 not to admit him to the next stage of Open Competition EPSO/AD/364/19 — Security Officers (AD 7), the notice of competition and the draft list of officials selected to take part in the competition and, second, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by him as a result of those acts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders MV to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 443, 21.12.2020.
Case T-582/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Ighoga Region 10 and Others v Commission (State aid — Construction of a hotel and congress centre in Ingolstadt — Decision finding no State aid — Procedural rights of interested parties — Failure to initiate formal investigation procedure — No serious difficulties)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bavaria, Germany, State aid, business tourism, control of State aid, hotel industry








C_2023007EN.01002202.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/22






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Ighoga Region 10 and Others v Commission
(Case T-582/20) (1)

(State aid - Construction of a hotel and congress centre in Ingolstadt - Decision finding no State aid - Procedural rights of interested parties - Failure to initiate formal investigation procedure - No serious difficulties)
(2023/C 7/28)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Interessengemeinschaft der Hoteliers und Gastronomen Region 10 e.V. (Ighoga Region 10) (Ingolstadt, Germany), MJ, MK (represented by: A. Bartosch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and K. Blanck, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller, acting as Agent)

Re:

By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek the annulment of Decision C(2020) 2623 final of the European Commission of 28 April 2020 declaring, at the end of the preliminary examination stage in State aid procedure SA. 48582 (2017/FC), that the measures referred to in the complaint brought on 4 July 2017 by Ighoga Region 10 and relating to the ongoing construction of the Ingolstadt Congress Centre (Germany) and a neighbouring hotel did not constitute State aid implemented by Germany in favour of the Maritim Group and KHI Immobilien GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Interessengemeinschaft der Hoteliers und Gastronomen Region 10 e.V. (Ighoga Region 10), MJ and MK to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 414, 30.11.2020.
Case T-718/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Kaczorowska v EUIPO — Groupe Marcelle (MAESELLE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark MAESELLE — Earlier EU figurative mark MARCELLE — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, hairdressing and beauty care, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2022482EN.01001902.xml










19.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 482/19






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Kaczorowska v EUIPO — Groupe Marcelle (MAESELLE)
(Case T-718/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark MAESELLE - Earlier EU figurative mark MARCELLE - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 482/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Katarzyna Kaczorowska (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: P. Kurcman, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Chylińska and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Groupe Marcelle Inc. (Lachine, Quebec, Canada)

Re:

By her action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 September 2021 (Case R 671/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ms Katarzyna Kaczorowska to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Case C-663/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 19 October 2022 — Expedia Inc. v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative transparency, disclosure of information, freedom to provide services, information society, provision of services, right of establishment, sanction (EU), search engine, trade information, trade intermediary








C_2023063EN.01001401.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 19 October 2022 — Expedia Inc. v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni
(Case C-663/22)
(2023/C 63/19)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Expedia Inc.

Defendant: Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni

Questions referred







1.


Does Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, (1) and in particular Article 15 thereof, as well as the principle of proportionality, preclude legislation of a Member State or a measure adopted by an independent national authority — such as those indicated in the grounds of the order for reference — requiring foreign providers of online intermediation services to submit a report containing information that is irrelevant as regards the aims of that regulation?










2.


In any event, can the information requested through the submission of the ESI be considered relevant and instrumental for the adequate and effective implementation of Regulation 2019/1150?






(1)  Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ 2019 L 186, p. 57).
Case T-653/22: Action brought on 19 October 2022 — Silex v Commission
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, financial aid, financial management, interest, reimbursement of aid








C_2022463EN.01006002.xml










5.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 463/60






Action brought on 19 October 2022 — Silex v Commission
(Case T-653/22)
(2022/C 463/89)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: Silex Ipari Automatizálási Zrt. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Á. Baratta, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Decision No C(2022) 5863 of 9 August 2022 relating to the recovery of EUR 27 726,44(twenty-seven thousand seven hundred twenty-six euro and forty-four cents) and late payment interest from Silex Ipari Automatizálizasi Zrt.; and










—


order the Commission to pay the costs, even if the applicant is unsuccessful, since the principle of sound administration was infringed.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicant puts forward four pleas in law.






1.


First, second and third pleas in law, alleging breach of the obligation to state reasons, manifest error of assessment and breach of the principle of sound financial management.






—


The Commission breached its obligation to state reasons, made a manifest error of assessment, and breached the principle of sound financial management by basing its Decision No C(2022) 5863 final of 9 August 2022, under which the applicant is required to pay 27 726,44 euros plus interest, on






—


the first annual revised report of the Executive Agency for Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (‘EASME’) of 25 April 2018, adopted after an on-site review that took place on in March 2018;










—


EASME’s letter of 15 June 2018, indicating for the first time its intention to terminate the grant agreement bearing the reference 739280 ELECTRIC_AXLE, concluded between the applicant and EASME, and the statement of reasons for that letter;










—


EASME’s letter of 8 October 2018 effectively terminating the grant agreement and the statement of reasons for that letter, and










—


EASME’s final report of 31 July 2019.


















2.


Fourth plea in law alleging breach of the principle of sound administration






—


The Commission breached the principle of sound administration






—


by failing to examine the merits of the complaint lodged by the applicant against the manner in which EASME acted in implementing the grant agreement; and










—


by claiming in the contested decision that the applicant had not responded to the payment notices and payment reminders.
Case T-270/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — JS v SRB (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Appraisal report — 2018 appraisal exercise — Manifest error of assessment — Principle of impartiality — Right to a fair hearing — Article 26 of the Staff Regulations — Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff — Liability)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: indemnification, rights of the defence, servant (EU), staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2023007EN.01002001.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/20






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — JS v SRB
(Case T-270/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Appraisal report - 2018 appraisal exercise - Manifest error of assessment - Principle of impartiality - Right to a fair hearing - Article 26 of the Staff Regulations - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Liability)
(2023/C 7/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: JS (represented by L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB) (represented by L. Forestier, acting as Agent, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, lodged at the Court Registry on 7 May 2020, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of his appraisal report for 2018 and of the decision of 22 January 2020 rejecting his complaint and, secondly, compensation for the damage which he claims to have suffered as a result.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JS to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 18 October 2022 2022/C 402/06
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022402EN.01001001.xml










19.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/10






Euro exchange rates (1)

18 October 2022
(2022/C 402/06)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


0,9835 




JPY


Japanese yen


146,65 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4393 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86928 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,9060 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9792 




ISK


Iceland króna


141,50 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,3528 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,593 




HUF


Hungarian forint


413,08 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,8040 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9359 




TRY


Turkish lira


18,2813 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5557 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3495 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


7,7200 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7251 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,3963 




KRW


South Korean won


1 400,92 




ZAR


South African rand


17,7904 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,0805 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5298 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 214,98 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6382 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,897 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,422 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,1795 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,6640 




INR


Indian rupee


80,9195 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-717/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Lenovo Global Technology Belgium v Joint Undertaking EuroHPC (Public procurement — Tendering procedure — Acquisition, delivery, installation and maintenance of the Leonardo Supercomputer for the hosting entity Cineca — Rejection of a tenderer’s bid — Equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, high-performance computing, public procurement, tendering








C_2022482EN.01001702.xml










19.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 482/17






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Lenovo Global Technology Belgium v Joint Undertaking EuroHPC
(Case T-717/20) (1)

(Public procurement - Tendering procedure - Acquisition, delivery, installation and maintenance of the Leonardo Supercomputer for the hosting entity Cineca - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Equal treatment - Principle of sound administration - Manifest error of assessment)
(2022/C 482/25)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Lenovo Global Technology Belgium BV (Machelen, Belgium) (represented by S. Sakellariou, G. Forwood and F. Abou Zeid, lawyers)

Defendant: European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (represented by P.-E. Partsch and F. Dewald, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by L. André, M. Ilkova, P.-J. Loewenthal, C. Vollrath and T. Van Noyen, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision Ares(2020)5103538 of the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC) of 29 September 2020 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant concerning the third lot in call for tenders SMART 2019/1084 relating to the acquisition, delivery, installation and maintenance of the Leonardo Supercomputer for the hosting entity Cineca and awarding the contract to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Lenovo Global Technology Belgium BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (EuroHPC);










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Case T-138/22: Order of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — HCP v EUIPO — Timm Health Care (PYLOMED)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022463EN.01006201.xml










5.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 463/62






Order of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — HCP v EUIPO — Timm Health Care (PYLOMED)
(Case T-138/22) (1)

(2022/C 463/92)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.