do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10934 – VINCI ENERGIES / KONTRON IT SERVICE COMPANIES) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 471/02
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: building industry, cloud computing, consultancy, economic concentration, energy industry, information technology industry, merger control, provision of services, public works








C_2022471EN.01000201.xml










12.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 471/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10934 – VINCI ENERGIES / KONTRON IT SERVICE COMPANIES)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 471/02)
On 16 November 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 32022M10934. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-512/21: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Epsilon Data Management v EUIPO — Epsilon Technologies (EPSILON TECHNOLOGIES) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark EPSILON TECHNOLOGIES — Genuine use of the mark — Article 18(1), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Nature of the use — Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character — Use in connection with the services in respect of which the mark was registered)
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, business management, consultancy, economic survey, registered trade mark, sales promotion, trade-mark law








C_2023024EN.01003701.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/37






Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Epsilon Data Management v EUIPO — Epsilon Technologies (EPSILON TECHNOLOGIES)
(Case T-512/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark EPSILON TECHNOLOGIES - Genuine use of the mark - Article 18(1), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Nature of the use - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Use in connection with the services in respect of which the mark was registered)
(2023/C 24/50)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Epsilon Data Management LLC (Plano, Texas, United States) (represented by: J. Bussé and C. De Preter, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: I. Harrington, D. Gája and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Epsilon Technologies, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó and E. Felip Corrius, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 June 2021 (Joined Cases R 1611/2020-5 and R 1839/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Epsilon Data Management LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Epsilon Technologies, SL.






(1)  OJ C 412, 11.10.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10910 – MACQUARIE / ABERDEEN / AIP / CERTAIN MÁSMÓVIL ASSETS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 464/03
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Internet access provider, Spain, banking, economic concentration, financial services, investment, investment company, merger control, provision of services, wholesale trade








C_2022464EN.01000301.xml










6.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 464/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10910 – MACQUARIE / ABERDEEN / AIP / CERTAIN MÁSMÓVIL ASSETS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 464/03)
On 16 November 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 32022M10910. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-706/22: Action brought on 16 November 2022 — Nicoventures Trading and Others v Commission
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: consumer information, derogation from EU law, general legal principle, labelling, market approval, powers of the institutions (EU), principle of legal certainty, smoking, tobacco, tobacco industry








C_2023015EN.01004601.xml










16.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 15/46






Action brought on 16 November 2022 — Nicoventures Trading and Others v Commission
(Case T-706/22)
(2023/C 15/60)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Nicoventures Trading Ltd (London, United Kingdom) and 5 other applicants (represented by: L. Van den Hende, M. Schonberg, J. Penz-Evren and P. Wytinck, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


order the annulment of the contested measure (1) in its entirety; and










—


order that the defendant pay the applicants’ costs in these proceedings.





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 that the contested measure goes beyond the powers delegated to the Commission under Articles 7(12) and 11(6) of Directive 2014/40/EU (2), for the following four reasons:






—


by regulating a novel tobacco product, the contested measure unlawfully addresses an ‘essential element’ within the meaning of Article 290(1) TFEU;










—


the contested measure unlawfully introduces a new ‘particular product category’ for the purposes of Directive 2014/40/EU and thereby also infringes the general EU law principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations;










—


The contested measure introduces a new ‘particular product category’ that is inconsistent with the system of Directive 2014/40/EU, and is consequently unlawful; and










—


The Commission’s approach to assessing the existence of a ‘substantial change of circumstances’ exceeds the scope of the task conferred upon it.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging failure to state reasons as required by Article 296 TFEU and infringement of the principle of good administration.






(1)  Commission’s Delegated Directive (EU) 2022/2100 of 29 June 2022 amending Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the withdrawal of certain exemptions in respect of heated tobacco products (OJ 2022, L 283, p. 4).

(2)  Directive 2014/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products and repealing Directive 2001/37/EC (OJ 2014, L 127, p. 1).
Case C-705/22 P: Appeal brought on 16 November 2022 by the European Investment Bank against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 7 September 2022 in Case T-751/20, KL v EIB
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, absenteeism, incapacity for work, indemnification, medical report, staff regulations (EU)








C_2023112EN.01001602.xml










27.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/16






Appeal brought on 16 November 2022 by the European Investment Bank against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 7 September 2022 in Case T-751/20, KL v EIB
(Case C-705/22 P)
(2023/C 112/22)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Investment Bank (represented by: G. Faedo and I. Zanin, acting as Agents, and A. Duron, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: KL
By order of 30 January 2023, the President of the Court removed Case C-705/22 P from the Court register and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.
Cases T-122/20 and T-123/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Sciessent v Commission (Biocidal products — Active substances — Silver zeolite and silver copper zeolite — Refusal of approval for product-types 2 and 7 — Article 4 and Article 19(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 — Efficacy — Active substances for use in treated articles — Assessment of the efficacy of the treated articles themselves — Competence of the Commission — Principle of non-discrimination — Legal certainty — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: biocide, chemical product, copper, decontamination, equal treatment, market approval, mineral compound, preservative, principle of legal certainty, silver








C_2023024EN.01003301.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/33






Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Sciessent v Commission
(Cases T-122/20 and T-123/20) (1)

(Biocidal products - Active substances - Silver zeolite and silver copper zeolite - Refusal of approval for product-types 2 and 7 - Article 4 and Article 19(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 - Efficacy - Active substances for use in treated articles - Assessment of the efficacy of the treated articles themselves - Competence of the Commission - Principle of non-discrimination - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations)
(2023/C 24/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sciessent LLC (Beverly, Massachusetts, United States) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem and P. Sellar, lawyers, and V. McElwee, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes and R. Lindenthal, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: R. Shahsavan Eriksson, C. Meyer-Seitz, A. Runeskjöld, M. Salborn Hodgson, H. Shev, H. Eklinder and O. Simonsson, acting as Agents), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and T. Zbihlej, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its actions pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1960 of 26 November 2019 not approving silver zeolite as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 2 and 7 (OJ 2019 L 306, p. 42) and Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1973 of 27 November 2019 not approving silver copper zeolite as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 2 and 7 (OJ 2019 L 307, p. 58).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Joins Cases T-122/20 and T-123/20 for the purposes of the present judgment;










2.


Dismisses the actions;










3.


Orders Sciessent LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










4.


Orders the Kingdom of Sweden and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to each bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Case C-703/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 16 November 2022 — WU v Directie van het Centraal Bureau Rijvaardigheidsbewijzen (CBR)
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: commercial vehicle, drivers, driving licence, medical examination, principle of proportionality, road safety








C_2023189EN.01000402.xml










30.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/4






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 16 November 2022 — WU v Directie van het Centraal Bureau Rijvaardigheidsbewijzen (CBR)
(Case C-703/22)
(2023/C 189/05)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: WU

Respondent: Directie van het Centraal Bureau Rijvaardigheidsbewijzen (CBR)

Questions referred







1.


Should point 6.4 of Annex III to Directive 2006/126/EC, (1) more specifically the standard of a horizontal field of vision of both eyes of at least 160o, read in the light of the principle of proportionality, be interpreted as meaning that a person who does not meet this standard from a medical point of view, but who, according to different medical experts, is actually fit to drive a lorry, can nevertheless meet the standard?










2.


If the answer to that question is in the negative, can a proportionality assessment be carried out within the framework of the Driving Licence Directive in an individual case, even if the criterion laid down in point 6.4 of Annex III to Directive 2006/126/EC does not provide any scope for exemption in such cases?










3.


If so, what are the circumstances that may play a role in assessing whether there may be derogation from the standard for the field of vision in a specific case, provided for in point 6.4 of Annex III to Directive 2006/126/EC?






(1)  OJ 2006 L 403, p. 18 (also ‘the Driving Licence Directive’).
Case T-796/21: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Grupo Eig Multimedia v EUIPO — Globalización de Valores CFC & GCI (FORO16) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark FORO16 — Earlier EU figurative and word marks Cambio16, Energia16, Cambio16 radio — Earlier national figurative and word marks Camb16, DEFENSA Y SEGURIDAD 16, CAMBIO16 DIGITAL, EVENTOS 16, Salón16 — Relative ground for refusal — Family of marks — No evidence — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Internet site, advertising, business management, education, electronic publishing, leisure, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023024EN.01003702.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/37






Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Grupo Eig Multimedia v EUIPO — Globalización de Valores CFC & GCI (FORO16)
(Case T-796/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark FORO16 - Earlier EU figurative and word marks Cambio16, Energia16, Cambio16 radio - Earlier national figurative and word marks Camb16, DEFENSA Y SEGURIDAD 16, CAMBIO16 DIGITAL, EVENTOS 16, Salón16 - Relative ground for refusal - Family of marks - No evidence - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2023/C 24/51)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Grupo Eig Multimedia, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: D. Solana Giménez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and R. Raponi, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Globalización de Valores CFC & GCI, SA (Mairena del Aljarafe, Spain) (represented by: I. Sánchez Iglesias, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks in particular the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 20 October 2021 (Case R 1785/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Grupo Eig Multimedia, SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 84, 21.2.2022.
Initiation of proceedings (Case M.10615 – BOOKING HOLDINGS / ETRAVELI GROUP) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 448/01
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, tourism, vehicle rental








C_2022448EN.01000101.xml










25.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 448/1






Initiation of proceedings
(Case M.10615 – BOOKING HOLDINGS / ETRAVELI GROUP)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 448/01)
On 16 November 2022, the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the above-mentioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration, and is without prejudice to the final decision on the case. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.
In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference No. M.10615 – BOOKING HOLDINGS / ETRAVELI GROUP, to the following 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’).
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 289/2022 of 16 November 2022 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement [2023/885]
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, Russo-Ukrainian issue, air traffic, airport, carrier, coronavirus disease, epidemic, military intervention, revision of an agreement, transport capacity, transport planning




L_2023117EN.01002001.xml










4.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 117/20








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 289/2022
of 16 November 2022
         
amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement [2023/885]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (“the EEA Agreement”), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Regulation (EU) 2022/2038 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 as regards temporary relief from the slot utilisation rules at Union airports due to an epidemiological situation or military aggression (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following indent is added in point 64b (Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93) of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement:






‘—



32022 R 2038: Regulation (EU) 2022/2038 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 (OJ L 275, 25.10.2022, p. 14).’






Article 2
The text of Regulation (EU) 2022/2038 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 16 November 2022, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*).


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 16 November 2022.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Kristján Andri STEFÁNSSON
            





(1)  
            OJ L 275, 25.10.2022, p. 14.

(*)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10892 – APOLLO / HINES / VI-BA / AEDES) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 14/02
Date: 2022-11-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, property development, real estate business








C_2023014EN.01000301.xml










16.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 14/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10892 – APOLLO / HINES / VI-BA / AEDES)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 14/02)
On 16 November 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 32022M10892. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.