do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10942 – PHO P / STORA ENSO MAXAU) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 466/03
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, foodstuff, merger control, pulp and paper industry, recycled product, retail trade, waste, waste management








C_2022466EN.01002001.xml










7.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 466/20






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10942 – PHO P / STORA ENSO MAXAU)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 466/03)
On 29 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 32022M10942. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/369 of 29 November 2022 correcting the Polish language version of Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 laying down requirements and administrative procedures related to aerodromes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Translation, European Commission
Subjects: European Aviation Safety Agency, air safety, airport, approval, civil aviation, roadworthiness tests








L_2023051EN.01002301.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 51/23








            COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2023/369
of 29 November 2022
         
correcting the Polish language version of Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 laying down requirements and administrative procedures related to aerodromes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council
(Text with EEA relevance)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2018 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and amending Regulations (EC) No 2111/2005, (EC) No 1008/2008, (EU) No 996/2010, (EU) No 376/2014 and Directives 2014/30/EU and 2014/53/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 552/2004 and (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 (1), and in particular Article 39(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The Polish language version of Annex IV to Commission Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 (2) contains an error in point ADR.OPS.B.080(b) that narrows the scope of the exemption laid down in that provision.












(2)


The Polish language version of Annex IV to Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 should therefore be corrected accordingly. The other language versions are not affected,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

(Does not concern the English language.)



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 November 2022.


For the Commission


The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 212, 22.8.2018, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 139/2014 of 12 February 2014 laying down requirements and administrative procedures related to aerodromes pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 44, 14.2.2014, p. 1).
Case T-749/22: Action brought on 29 November 2022 — Parliament v Union Technique du Bâtiment and Argest
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: building, civil liability proceedings, damages, interest, producer's liability








C_2023024EN.01008002.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/80






Action brought on 29 November 2022 — Parliament v Union Technique du Bâtiment and Argest
(Case T-749/22)
(2023/C 24/107)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Kazek and K. Wójcik, acting as Agents, and by N. Charrel, T. Gaspar and M. Jolly, lawyers)

Defendants: Union Technique du Bâtiment SA (Romainville, France) and Argest SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


order the companies Union Technique du Bâtiment SA and Argest SA jointly and severally to pay it a total sum of EUR 161 200, together with statutory interest accruing from the date on which the present application was filed, capitalised to produce interest itself;










—


order the defendants to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law alleging that it has a right to compensation under the ten-year warranty provided by the companies Union Technique du Bâtiment SA and Argest SA for defects discovered to be affecting the thatched roof of Maison Jean Monnet in Bazoches-sur-Guyonne.
Case T-746/22: Action brought on 29 November 2022 — BIW Invest v EUIPO — New Yorker Marketing & Media International (COMPTON)
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023024EN.01007801.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/78






Action brought on 29 November 2022 — BIW Invest v EUIPO — New Yorker Marketing & Media International (COMPTON)
(Case T-746/22)
(2023/C 24/104)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: BIW Invest AG (Appenzell, Switzerland) (represented by: E. Mielke, U. Stelzenmüller and J. Weiser, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: New Yorker Marketing & Media International GmbH (Brunswick, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark COMPTON — EU word mark No 14 539 092

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2022 in Case R 1915/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and, as the case may be, the other party to bear the costs of the present proceedings and of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of the second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of the first sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-734/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 29 November 2022 — Republic of Austria v GM
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, aid to agriculture, contract, control of State aid, limitation of legal proceedings, principle of proportionality, reimbursement of aid, rural development








C_2023094EN.01001801.xml










13.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 94/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 29 November 2022 — Republic of Austria v GM
(Case C-734/22)
(2023/C 94/20)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Republic of Austria

Respondent to the appeal on a point of law: GM

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (1) directly applicable to claims by which the Republic of Austria seeks to recover aid it granted under a contract to funding applicants within the framework of an agri-environmental aid programme under Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (2) by means of private-law remedies because the recipient infringed contractual obligations?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, must the third subparagraph of Article 3(1) of the regulation referred to in Question 1 be interpreted as meaning that there is an interruption of the limitation period by the investigation or legal proceedings also when the party who issued the aid, after making its first extrajudicial claim for repayment, asks the recipient of the aid again, if need be several times, to make the repayment, and issues an extrajudicial demand for payment instead of asserting its repayment claim in court?










3.


If the answer to the first question is in the negative, is the application of a limitation period of 30 years provided for by national civil law in respect of the recovery claims referred to in Question 1 compatible with EU law, in particular with the principle of proportionality?






(1)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ 1995 L 312, p. 1).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2005 L 277, p. 1).
Case C-733/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 29 November 2022 — Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na NAP v ‘Valentina Heights’ EOOD
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, hotel industry, provision of services, tax relief








C_2023063EN.01002101.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/21






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 29 November 2022 — Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na NAP v ‘Valentina Heights’ EOOD
(Case C-733/22)
(2023/C 63/27)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Varhoven administrativen sad

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant in cassation: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia pri Tsentralno upravlenie na NAP

Respondent in cassation:‘Valentina Heights’ EOOD

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 98(2) of, in conjunction with point 12 of Annex III to, Council Regulation 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax be interpreted as meaning that the reduced rate made available in that provision for accommodation provided in hotels and similar establishments may be applied where those establishments have not been categorised in accordance with the national legal provisions of the Member State requesting the preliminary ruling[?]










2.


If that question is answered in the negative, must Article 98(2) of, in conjunction with point 12 of Annex III to, Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax be interpreted as meaning that it allows the reduced rate to be applied selectively to concrete and specific aspects of a given category of supply, in the case where the application of the reduced rate is subject to the condition that ‘accommodation provided in hotels and similar establishments’ may take place only in accommodation facilities which have been categorised in accordance with the national legal provisions of the Member State requesting the preliminary ruling, or in respect of which a provisional certificate attesting to the commencement of categorisation proceedings has been issued[?]






(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10958 – CARLYLE / GARNICA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 222/04
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: European Economic Area, building industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, motor vehicle industry, packaging product, plywood








C_2023222EN.01003001.xml










26.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/30






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10958 – CARLYLE / GARNICA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 222/04)
On 29 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 32022M10958. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 28 November 2022 2022/C 452/02
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022452EN.01001501.xml










29.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/15






Euro exchange rates (1)

28 November 2022
(2022/C 452/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0463 




JPY


Japanese yen


144,90 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4367 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86606 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,8973 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9872 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,3640 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,348 




HUF


Hungarian forint


408,87 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6938 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9246 




TRY


Turkish lira


19,4844 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5632 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4062 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,1782 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6827 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4375 




KRW


South Korean won


1 396,56 




ZAR


South African rand


17,9376 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,5326 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5488 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 440,45 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6874 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,210 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,285 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,6354 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,2200 




INR


Indian rupee


85,4370 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Notice concerning valid proofs of origin for products originating in Côte d’Ivoire on importation into the European Union as from 2 December 2022, under the EU - Côte d’Ivoire stepping-stone Economic Partnership Agreement 2022/C 452/06
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: Côte d'Ivoire, certificate of origin, cooperation agreement (EU), economic cooperation, import (EU), interim agreement (EU), tariff exemption








C_2022452EN.01002201.xml










29.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/22






Notice concerning valid proofs of origin for products originating in Côte d’Ivoire on importation into the European Union as from 2 December 2022, under the EU - Côte d’Ivoire stepping-stone Economic Partnership Agreement
(2022/C 452/06)
This notice is issued for the information of customs authorities, importers and economic operators, which are involved in imports into the European Union of products originating in Côte d’Ivoire under the stepping-stone Economic Partnership Agreement (‘the stepping-stone EPA’).
In accordance with Articles 17(3) and 21(1) points (b) and (c) of Protocol 1 to the stepping-stone EPA, and without prejudice to the exemptions laid down in Articles 17(4) and 26 of that Protocol, as from 2 December 2022 products originating in Côte d’Ivoire shall, on importation into the European Union, benefit from the preferential tariff treatment of the stepping-stone EPA only upon submission of an origin declaration made out by:






(i)


by an exporter registered in accordance with the relevant provisions of Ivorian law;
or










(ii)


by any exporter, for any consignment consisting of one or more packages containing originating products, the total value of which does not exceed EUR 6 000.
Case C-735/22 P: Appeal brought on 29 November 2022 by Primagran sp. z o.o. against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 22 September 2022 in Case T-624/21, Primagran v EUIPO — Primagaz (prımagran)
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, household article, plumbing equipment, registered trade mark, retail trade, special chemicals, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2023173EN.01001003.xml










15.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 173/10






Appeal brought on 29 November 2022 by Primagran sp. z o.o. against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 22 September 2022 in Case T-624/21, Primagran v EUIPO — Primagaz (prımagran)
(Case C-735/22 P)
(2023/C 173/15)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Primagran sp. z o.o. (represented by: E. Jaroszyńska-Kozłowska, radca prawny)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Compagnie des gaz de pétrole Primagaz
By order of 24 March 2023, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Primagran sp. z o.o. should bear its own costs.
Corrigendum to Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community – Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services (Official Journal of the European Union C 210 of 25 May 2022) 2022/C 452/14
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: Italy, Sicily, air transport, inland transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2022452EN.01005501.xml










29.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 452/55






Corrigendum to Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community – Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(
Official Journal of the European Union C 210 of 25 May 2022
)

(2022/C 452/14)
On page 30, section ‘Date of entry into force of the public service obligations’, as corrected by the corrigendum published on 3 August 2022 (2022/C 296/06):
for:

‘16 December 2022’

read:

‘1 December 2022’
Case T-747/22: Action brought on 29 November 2022 — BIW Invest v EUIPO — New Yorker Marketing & Media International (Compton)
Date: 2022-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023024EN.01007901.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/79






Action brought on 29 November 2022 — BIW Invest v EUIPO — New Yorker Marketing & Media International (Compton)
(Case T-747/22)
(2023/C 24/105)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: BIW Invest AG (Appenzell, Switzerland) (represented by: E. Mielke, U. Stelzenmüller and J. Weiser, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: New Yorker Marketing & Media International GmbH (Brunswick, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark Compton — EU word mark No 15 578 776

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2022 in Case R 1913/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and, as the case may be, the other party to bear the costs of the present proceedings and of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of the second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of the first sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.