do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-724/22: Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Neottolemo v Commission
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Madeira, Portugal, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, corporation tax, regional aid, reimbursement of aid, tax exemption, tax relief








C_2023063EN.01005601.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/56






Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Neottolemo v Commission
(Case T-724/22)
(2023/C 63/73)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Neottolemo, Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: G. Leite de Campos and M. Clemente, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul Articles 1 to 3, Article 4(1) to (3) and the second part of (4), and Articles 5 and 6 of Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III (notified under document C(2020) 8550); (1)











—


order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.
First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 108(2) TFEU and Articles 21 to 23 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015.
Second plea in law, alleging an irreconcilable contradiction between the contested decision and the reasons on which it is based.
Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of conferral of powers, enshrined in Article 5 TFEU.
Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 107 TFEU, in that some of the cases included in the decision do not involve State aid and the Portuguese State has been unjustly enriched, in breach of the principle that the wrongdoer (the Portuguese State) should not benefit from the infringement.
Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 26 TFEU as regards the promotion of the internal market.


(1)  OJ 2022 L 217, p. 49.
Case T-723/22: Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Sonasurf Internacional and Others v Commission
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Madeira, Portugal, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, corporation tax, regional aid, reimbursement of aid, tax exemption, tax relief








C_2023024EN.01006201.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/62






Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Sonasurf Internacional and Others v Commission
(Case T-723/22)
(2023/C 24/86)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicants: Sonasurf Internacional — Shipping Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal, Portugal), Mastshipping — Shipping, Sociedade Unipessoal Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal), Latin Quarter — Serviços Marítimos Internacionais Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal) (represented by: R. Bordalo Junqueiro, S. Fernandes de Almeida, R. F. Costa and P. G. Marques, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:






—


recognise the applicants’ legitimate interest in bringing the present action for annulment under Article 263 TFEU;










—


declare that the present action for annulment has been brought in due form and is admissible under Article 263 TFEU;










—


annul the contested decision pursuant to Article 264 TFEU;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings together with the expenses incurred by the applicants.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of their action against Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III (notified under document C(2020) 8550) (OJ 2022 L 217, p. 49), the applicants rely on four pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-718/22, Eutelsat Madeira v Commission.
Case C-702/22 P: Appeal brought on 15 November 2022 by Okan Balaban against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 14 September 2022 in Case T-705/21, Okan Balaban v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, air conditioning, clothing, electricity storage device, hand tool, machine tool, metalworking, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023127EN.01001502.xml










11.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 127/15






Appeal brought on 15 November 2022 by Okan Balaban against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 14 September 2022 in Case T-705/21, Okan Balaban v European Union Intellectual Property Office
(Case C-702/22 P)
(2023/C 127/18)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Okan Balaban (represented by T. Schaaf, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 1 February 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) decided that the appeal should not be allowed to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear his own costs.
Case C-646/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Senatsverwaltung für Inneres und Sport, Standesamtsaufsicht v TB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility — Divorce — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 2(4) and Article 21 — Concept of ‘judgment’ — Recognition, in a Member State, of the dissolution of a marriage agreed in an agreement between spouses and pronounced by a civil registrar of another Member State — Criterion for determining the existence of a ‘judgment’)
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil register, divorce, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, official document, ruling








C_2023015EN.01001001.xml










16.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 15/10






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 November 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Senatsverwaltung für Inneres und Sport, Standesamtsaufsicht v TB
(Case C-646/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility - Divorce - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Article 2(4) and Article 21 - Concept of ‘judgment’ - Recognition, in a Member State, of the dissolution of a marriage agreed in an agreement between spouses and pronounced by a civil registrar of another Member State - Criterion for determining the existence of a ‘judgment’)
(2023/C 15/09)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Senatsverwaltung für Inneres und Sport, Standesamtsaufsicht

Defendant: TB

Intervening parties: Standesamt Mitte von Berlin, RD

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000,
must be interpreted, in particular for the purpose of the application of Article 21(1) of that regulation, as meaning that a divorce decree drawn up by a civil registrar of the Member State of origin, containing a divorce agreement concluded by the spouses and confirmed by them before that registrar in accordance with the conditions laid down by the legislation of that Member State, constitutes a ‘judgment’ within the meaning of Article 2(4).


(1)  OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.
Case T-722/22: Action brought on 15 November 2022 — AFG v Commission
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Madeira, Portugal, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, corporation tax, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, reimbursement of aid, tax exemption, tax relief








C_2023024EN.01006102.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/61






Action brought on 15 November 2022 — AFG v Commission
(Case T-722/22)
(2023/C 24/85)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: AFG SA (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: S. Estima Martins, F. Castro Guedes and L. Seifert Guincho, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul Articles 1, 4, 5 and 6 of Commission Decision C(2020) 8550 final of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal in favour of the Madeira Free Zone (MFZ) — Regime III, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, L 217 of 22 August 2022, page 49;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs in their entirety.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.
First plea in law, alleging error of law in that the measure at issue does not constitute State aid, in so far as the Commission wrongly considered that that scheme constitutes a selective measure, and breach of the obligation to state reasons, enshrined in Article 296 TFEU, in respect of the analysis of the condition relating to selectivity.
Second plea in law, alleging that the Zona Franca da Madeira — Regime III aid scheme has been implemented in accordance with the Commission Decisions of 2007 and 2017 and with the rules laid down in Articles 107 and 108 TFEU.
Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the general principles of EU law, specifically the principles of legal certainty, protection of legitimate expectations, and proportionality.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10943 – ENEL / CVC CAPITAL PARTNERS / GRIDSPERTISE) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 433/21
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, economic concentration, electrical energy, energy production, gas supply, merger control, software, transmission network








C_2022433EN.01005601.xml










15.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 433/56






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10943 – ENEL / CVC CAPITAL PARTNERS / GRIDSPERTISE)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 433/21)

1.   
On 3 November 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:






—


Enel S.p.A. (‘Enel’, Italy),










—


CVC Capital Partners SICAV-FIS S.A. (‘CVC Capital Partners’, Luxembourg),










—


Gridspertise S.r.l. (‘Gridspertise’, Italy), currently controlled by Enel.




Enel and CVC Capital Partners will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Gridspertise.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


Enel: an integrated global player active in electricity generation and gas distribution and supply,










—


CVC Capital Partners: a provider of advice to and management of investment funds with interests in a number of companies active in a variety of industries around the world,










—


Gridspertise: a supplier of smart grid equipment for distributor system operators and grid users.






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.10943 – ENEL / CVC CAPITAL PARTNERS / GRIDSPERTISE
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.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2281 of 15 November 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Lumblija’ (PGI))
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: County of Dubrovnik-Neretva, Croatia, bread, confectionery product, designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2022301EN.01002101.xml










22.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 301/21








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/2281
of 15 November 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Lumblija’ (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, Croatia’s application to register the name ‘Lumblija’ 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 ‘Lumblija’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Lumblija’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 2.3. – Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares, 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, 15 November 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 286, 27.7.2022, p. 57.

(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-700/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 15 November 2022 — RegioJet a. s., STUDENT AGENCY k.s. v České dráhy, a.s., Správa železnic, státní organizace, Česká republika, Ministerstvo dopravy
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, carriage of passengers, control of State aid, limitation of legal proceedings, reimbursement of aid








C_2023045EN.01000901.xml










6.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/9






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 15 November 2022 — RegioJet a. s., STUDENT AGENCY k.s. v České dráhy, a.s., Správa železnic, státní organizace, Česká republika, Ministerstvo dopravy
(Case C-700/22)
(2023/C 45/15)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: RegioJet a. s., STUDENT AGENCY k.s.

Defendants: České dráhy, a.s., Správa železnic, státní organizace, Česká republika, Ministerstvo dopravy

Question referred

Must the last sentence of Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union be interpreted as meaning that a national court must, in proceedings initiated on the application of a third party (competitor), order the recipient to return aid provided in breach of that provision even though (as at the date of the court’s decision) the limitation period for the Commission’s powers pursuant to Article 17(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 (1) of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has expired, due to which the aid provided is deemed, pursuant to Article 1(b)(iv) and Article 17(3) of the Regulation, to constitute existing aid?


(1)  OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9.
Case T-721/22: Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Bourbon Offshore Interoil Shipping v Commission
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Madeira, Portugal, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, corporation tax, regional aid, reimbursement of aid, tax exemption, tax relief








C_2023035EN.01007001.xml










30.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 35/70






Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Bourbon Offshore Interoil Shipping v Commission
(Case T-721/22)
(2023/C 35/91)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Bourbon Offshore Interoil Shipping — Navegação, Lda (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: S. Fernandes Martins and M. Mendonça Saraiva, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III;










—


in any event, without prejudice to the previous head of claim, annul Article 4 of Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) and, consequently, the order to recover the aid from the beneficiaries, together with interest;










—


annul the contested decision in accordance with Article 264 TFEU;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.
First plea in law, alleging that the methodology proposed by the European Commission of defining the concept of ‘job creation’ in FTEs (Full-Time Equivalents) and ALUs (Annual Labour Units), as used in the Guidelines on national regional aid for 2007-2013 (OJ 2006 C 54, p. 13), is inapplicable.
Second plea in law, alleging the inadmissibility of the order to recover the aid from the beneficiaries and to pay interest.
Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia 2022/C 433/17
Date: 2022-11-15
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Tunisia, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








C_2022433EN.01005101.xml










15.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 433/51






Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia
(2022/C 433/17)
The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP (1), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 (2), concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia.
The Council has received information from the Tunisian authorities that will be considered within the framework of the annual review of the restrictive measures concerning all persons listed in the Annex to Decision 2011/72/CFSP and in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 101/2011. The persons concerned are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the information that relates to them, before 22 November 2022, to the following address:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




RELEX.1




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu
Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council's periodic review, in accordance with Article 5 of Decision 2011/72/CFSP and Article 12(4) of Regulation (EU) No 101/2011.


(1)  OJ L 28, 2.2.2011, p. 62.

(2)  OJ L 31, 5.2.2011, p. 1.