do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-494/21: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court (Ireland) — Ireland) — Eircom Limited v Commission for Communications Regulation (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Electronic communications networks and services — Universal service and users’ rights — Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive) — Article 12 — Costing and financing of universal service obligations — Single universal service provider and multiple telecommunications services providers operating in the market — Determination as to whether an unfair burden exists)
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competitiveness, consumer protection, costing, postal and telecommunications services, provision of services, regulation of telecommunications, transmission network, universal service








C_2023007EN.01001101.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/11






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court (Ireland) — Ireland) — Eircom Limited v Commission for Communications Regulation
(Case C-494/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications networks and services - Universal service and users’ rights - Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive) - Article 12 - Costing and financing of universal service obligations - Single universal service provider and multiple telecommunications services providers operating in the market - Determination as to whether an unfair burden exists)
(2023/C 7/13)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court (Ireland)

Parties to the main proceedings


Plaintiff: Eircom Limited

Defendant: Commission for Communications Regulation

Notice parties: Vodafone Ireland Limited, Three Ireland (Hutchison) Limited, Three Ireland Services (Hutchison) Limited

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 12 and 13 of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive),
must be interpreted as requiring the competent national regulatory authority, in order to determine whether the net cost of universal service obligations represents an unfair burden on an operator entrusted with such obligations, to examine the characteristics particular to that operator, taking account of its situation relative to that of its competitors in the relevant market.


(1)  OJ C 431, 25.10.2021.
Case C-414/21: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie — Belgium) — VP Capital NV v Belgische Staat (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of establishment — Article 49 and 54 TFEU — Transfer of a company’s registered office to a Member State other than that in which it was incorporated — Recovery of write-downs recorded prior to the transfer — Exemption — Comparability of situations)
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, establishment, loss, right of establishment, share, tax law, tax relief, taxable income, transfer of businesses








C_2023007EN.01000802.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/8






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie — Belgium) — VP Capital NV v Belgische Staat
(Case C-414/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of establishment - Article 49 and 54 TFEU - Transfer of a company’s registered office to a Member State other than that in which it was incorporated - Recovery of write-downs recorded prior to the transfer - Exemption - Comparability of situations)
(2023/C 7/10)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: VP Capital NV

Respondent: Belgische Staat

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU does not preclude national tax legislation under which increases in value of shares in companies recorded by a company in a Member State, after the transfer of its registered office in that Member State, are treated as being expressed but unrealised capital gains, without taking into account whether those shares gave rise to the recording of write-downs by that company on a date on which it was a taxable resident of another Member State.


(1)  OJ C 368, 13.9.2021.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 November 2022 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion on behalf of the European Union, of an agreement on the modification of schedules of specific commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services to incorporate Annex 1 of the Declaration on the Conclusion of Negotiations on Services Domestic Regulation of 2 December 2021 (09982/2022 — C9-0224/2022 — 2022/0174(NLE))
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: EU Member State, GATS, World Trade Organisation, international negotiations, international trade, multilateral agreement, provision of services, ratification of an agreement, service, trade regulations








C_2023161EN.01002201.xml










5.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/22






P9_TA(2022)0378
Conclusion of an agreement under GATS on the modification of schedules of specific commitments
European Parliament legislative resolution of 10 November 2022 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion on behalf of the European Union, of an agreement on the modification of schedules of specific commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services to incorporate Annex 1 of the Declaration on the Conclusion of Negotiations on Services Domestic Regulation of 2 December 2021 (09982/2022 — C9-0224/2022 — 2022/0174(NLE))
(Consent)
(2023/C 161/05)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (09982/2022),










—


having regard to the draft agreement on the modification of schedules of specific commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services to incorporate Annex 1 of the Declaration on the Conclusion of Negotiations on Services Domestic Regulation of 2 December 2021 (09982/2022),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 91, Article 100(2), Article 207(4), first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) (v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C9-0224/2022),










—


having regard to Rule 105(1) and (4), and Rule 114(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A9-0257/2022),












1.


Gives its consent to the conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and to the World Trade Organization.
Euro 7 standards : new rules for vehicle emissions.
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs
Subjects: European standard, air quality, pollution control measures, reduction of gas emissions, road transport, testing

Euro 7 standards: 
new rules for vehicle 
emissions    

10 November 2022
#EuropeanGreenDeal

Road  transport  is  the  largest  source  of  air  pollution  in  cities.  The  new  Euro 
7  standards  will  ensure  cleaner  vehicles  on  our  roads  and  improve  air  quality, 
protecting the health of our citizens and the environment.  

Air pollution from road transport is responsible for: 

39% of the harmful 
NOx emissions in the EU 

[all figures relate to the EU28 in 2018]

And 47% of NOx 
emissions in urban areas

10% of total particle 
matter (PM2.5) emissions 
in the EU

What’s new in the Euro 7 regulation? 
For all cars, vans, trucks and buses

Limits for 
emissions from 
brakes

Rules on 
microplastic 
pollution from 
tyres 

More effective 
emissions tests  

Digital monitoring 
of compliance   

Vehicles need 
to comply with 
emissions rules 
for longer period

Better market 
surveillance tests

For internal combustion engine vehicles

Fuel- and 
technology-
neutral emission 
limits

Regulating  
additional 
pollutants

On-road tests with 
broader range of 
driving conditions

For electric and plugin hybrid vehicles

Battery durability 
requirements

What will be the impact of the Euro 7 rules?

The new rules will apply to both cars and vans but also heavier vehicles, such as lorries and 
buses. They remain relevant even with the 100% target for zero emission cars and vans in 
2035, as more than 20% of cars and vans and more than 50% of the heavier vehicles on 
our streets are expected to emit pollutants from the tailpipe up to 2050. Moreover, the new 
rules on emissions from brakes, tyres and for batteries durability will be relevant for electric 
vehicles as well. 

Lower emissions by 2035 compared to Euro6/VI

Reduction of NOx emissions

35% from cars and vans 

56% from buses and lorries

Reduction of particles from the tailpipe

13% from cars and vans

 39% from buses and lorries

Reduction of particles from the brakes

27% from the brakes of a car and vans 

Low impact on consumers

These emission reductions are expected to be achieved with existing technologies.  A moderate impact on the costs 
of cars - between €90 and €150 - and on the cost of buses and lorries - around €2600 - is expected.

Big benefit for health and environment 

For each euro spent on technologies for Euro 7, more than 5 euros are saved on health and environment.

© European Union, 2022
Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by 
Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). For any use or reproductionof elements that are not owned by the European 
Union, permission may need to be sought directly from the respective rightholders.
All images © European Union unless otherwise stated.

PDF 

 ISBN 978-92-76-58723-1   doi:10.2873/99010   ET-03-22-116-EN-N
Case C-442/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 — ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S, Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Postal sector — Compensation for the discharge of a universal service obligation — Calculation — Net avoided cost methodology — Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service — Use of funds granted as compensation — Guarantee covering the redundancy costs of a certain category of employee in the event of insolvency of the universal service provider — Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market)
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Denmark, State aid, control of State aid, financial solvency, intangible asset, postal service, universal service








C_2023007EN.01000901.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/9






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 — ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S, Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission
(Case C-442/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Postal sector - Compensation for the discharge of a universal service obligation - Calculation - Net avoided cost methodology - Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service - Use of funds granted as compensation - Guarantee covering the redundancy costs of a certain category of employee in the event of insolvency of the universal service provider - Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market)
(2023/C 7/11)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S, Danske Fragtmænd A/S (represented by L. Sandberg-Mørch, advokat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by K. Blanck, J. Carpi Badía and L. Nicolae, acting as Agents), Jørgen Jensen Distribution A/S, Dansk Distribution A/S, Kingdom of Denmark (represented initially by V. Pasternak Jørgensen and M. Søndahl Wolff, acting as Agents, and by R. Holdgaard, advokat, and subsequently by M. Søndahl Wolff, acting as Agent, and by R. Holdgaard, advokat)

Intervener in support of the European Commission: Post Danmark (represented by O. Koktvedgaard, advokat)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S to bear, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Declares that the Kingdom of Denmark and Post Danmark are to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 382, 20.9.2021.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.10507 – HITACHI RAIL / GROUND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS BUSINESS OF THALES) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 428/01
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, maintenance, merger control, provision of services, rail transport, railway tariff, telecommunications








C_2022428EN.01000101.xml










10.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/1






Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case M.10507 – HITACHI RAIL / GROUND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS BUSINESS OF THALES)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 428/01)
On 4 October 2022, the European Commission received notification (1) of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) (‘Merger Regulation’).
On 3 November 2022, the notifying party informed the Commission that it withdrew its notification.


(1)  OJ C 391, 12.10.2022, p. 7.

(2)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-203/21: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okrazhen sad — Burgas — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against DELTA STROY 2003 (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA — Applicability — Imposition of a financial penalty on a legal person for non-payment of tax debts — Concept of ‘confiscation’ — Articles 48, 49 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Penalties of a criminal nature — Principles of the presumption of innocence and the legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties — Rights of the defence — Imposition of a criminal penalty on a legal person for an offence committed by the representative of that legal person — Parallel criminal proceedings against that representative that have not been concluded — Proportionality)
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: confiscation of property, debt, fine, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, legal person, managing director, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, tax offence








C_2023007EN.01000601.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/6






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okrazhen sad — Burgas — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against DELTA STROY 2003
(Case C-203/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA - Applicability - Imposition of a financial penalty on a legal person for non-payment of tax debts - Concept of ‘confiscation’ - Articles 48, 49 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Penalties of a criminal nature - Principles of the presumption of innocence and the legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties - Rights of the defence - Imposition of a criminal penalty on a legal person for an offence committed by the representative of that legal person - Parallel criminal proceedings against that representative that have not been concluded - Proportionality)
(2023/C 7/07)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Okrazhen sad — Burgas

Party in the main proceedings

DELTA STROY 2003

Intervening party: Okrazhna prokuratura — Burgas

Operative part of the judgment

Article 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which a national court may impose on a legal person a criminal penalty for an offence for which a natural person who has the power to bind or represent that legal person is allegedly liable, where that legal person has not been put in a position to dispute the reality of that offence.


(1)  OJ C 228, 14.6.2021.
Case C-695/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Městský soud v Praze (Czech Republic) lodged on 10 November 2022 — Fondee a.s. v Česká národní banka
Date: 2022-11-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European passport, financial instrument, financial occupation, freedom to provide services, investment, provision of services, securities








C_2023035EN.01003602.xml










30.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 35/36






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Městský soud v Praze (Czech Republic) lodged on 10 November 2022 — Fondee a.s. v Česká národní banka
(Case C-695/22)
(2023/C 35/44)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Městský soud v Praze

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Fondee a.s.

Defendant: Česká národní banka

Questions referred







1.


Does a person who is, pursuant to Article 3(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (MiFID II), excluded from the scope of that Directive, and who does not, pursuant to Article 3(3) of the Directive, enjoy the freedom to provide services as defined in Article 34 thereof, enjoy the right to freedom to provide services embodied in Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, if it itself does not provide investment services on the basis of a single European passport to a client established in another Member State, but rather receives an investment service from a foreign entity using a single European passport or otherwise takes part in its provision to the end client (acts as an intermediary)?










2.


If the answer to the previous question is affirmative, does EU law, namely Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, preclude legislation prohibiting an investment broker from transmitting a client’s order to a foreign securities trader?






(1)  OJ 2014 L 173, p. 349.