do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-111/22: Order of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Baert v Commission (Civil service — Retirement pension — Pension rights acquired before entry into the service of the European Union — Transfer to the EU scheme — Crediting of additional years of pensionable service — Action for annulment — Request for repayment of transferred capital which has not given rise to a crediting of additional years — Time limit for complaints — Unjust enrichment — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, seniority, staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2023063EN.01005101.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/51






Order of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Baert v Commission
(Case T-111/22) (1)

(Civil service - Retirement pension - Pension rights acquired before entry into the service of the European Union - Transfer to the EU scheme - Crediting of additional years of pensionable service - Action for annulment - Request for repayment of transferred capital which has not given rise to a crediting of additional years - Time limit for complaints - Unjust enrichment - Manifest inadmissibility)
(2023/C 63/67)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Rhonny Baert (Deinze, Belgium) (represented by: D. Grisay and A. Ansay, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin, M. Brauhoff and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Van Pottelberge and M. Windisch, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and I. Demoulin, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, principally, first, annulment of the alleged implicit decision of the European Commission of 28 February 2022 rejecting his complaint in so far as it concerns annulment of the notification of 21 December 2016 on the determination of his retirement pension rights and, second, referral of his case to the appointing authority of the Commission to determine the amount to repay him and, in the alternative, an order requiring the Commission to pay a sum of EUR 31 066,80, on the ground of unjust enrichment.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Rhonny Baert is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay those of the European Commission.










3.


The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union are to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 158, 11.4.2022.
Case T-126/20: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Autoridad Portuaria de Bilbao v Commission (State aid — Ports sector — Corporate tax exemption scheme implemented by Spain in favour of ports in the province of Biscay — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market — Existing aid — Advantage — Burden of proof — Selective nature — Effect on trade between Member States — Distortion of competition — Appropriate measures)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Basque Country, Spain, State aid, control of State aid, corporation tax, harbour installation, reimbursement of aid, tax exemption








C_2023063EN.01003102.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/31






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Autoridad Portuaria de Bilbao v Commission
(Case T-126/20) (1)

(State aid - Ports sector - Corporate tax exemption scheme implemented by Spain in favour of ports in the province of Biscay - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Existing aid - Advantage - Burden of proof - Selective nature - Effect on trade between Member States - Distortion of competition - Appropriate measures)
(2023/C 63/38)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Autoridad Portuaria de Bilbao (Bilbao, Spain) (represented by: D. Sarmiento Ramírez-Escudero and X. Codina García-Andrade, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky, acting as Agent)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of: (i) Commission Decision C(2018) 8676 final of 8 January 2019 concerning State aid SA.38397 (2018/E) — Taxation on ports in Spain, by which the Commission found that State aid in the form of corporate tax exemptions granted by the Kingdom of Spain to its port authorities was existing aid which is incompatible with the internal market and proposed ‘appropriate measures’ in accordance with Article 108(1) TFEU; (ii) Commission Decision C(2019) 1765 final of 7 March 2019 concerning State aid SA.38397 (2018/E) — Taxation of ports in Spain, by which the Commission corrected its proposal for appropriate measures; and (iii) Commission Decision C(2019) 8068 final of 15 November 2019 on State aid SA.38397 (2018/E) — Corporate tax exemption for port authorities in Spain — Decision to record acceptance of proposed appropriate measures (existing aid), based on Article 23 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 TFEU (OJ 2015 L 248, p. 9), by which the Commission took note that the Kingdom of Spain had accepted the proposed appropriate measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Autoridad Portuaria de Bilbao to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 13 December 2022 2022/C 474/09
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022474EN.01003701.xml










14.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 474/37






Euro exchange rates (1)

13 December 2022
(2022/C 474/09)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0545 




JPY


Japanese yen


144,85 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4391 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85753 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,8965 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9869 




ISK


Iceland króna


151,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,4679 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,287 




HUF


Hungarian forint


409,65 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6938 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9298 




TRY


Turkish lira


19,6649 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5553 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4341 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2033 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6464 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4288 




KRW


South Korean won


1 378,75 




ZAR


South African rand


18,6855 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3637 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5495 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 521,81 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6704 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,852 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,707 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,5784 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,9435 




INR


Indian rupee


87,2965 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-636/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Eurol v EUIPO — Pernsteiner (eurol LUBRICANTS) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark eurol LUBRICANTS — Earlier national word mark EUROLLUBRICANTS — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark — Articles 15 and 57 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18 and 64 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Use with the trade mark proprietor’s consent — No alteration of distinctive character — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, lubricants, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023063EN.01004301.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/43






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Eurol v EUIPO — Pernsteiner (eurol LUBRICANTS)
(Case T-636/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark eurol LUBRICANTS - Earlier national word mark EUROLLUBRICANTS - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Articles 15 and 57 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18 and 64 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Use with the trade mark proprietor’s consent - No alteration of distinctive character - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(2023/C 63/54)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Eurol BV (Nijverdal, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Driessen and G. van Roeyen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: August Wolfgang Pernsteiner (Feldkirchen an der Donau, Austria) (represented by: J. Öhlböck, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 July 2021 (Case R 2403/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Eurol BV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.
Case T-614/21: Order of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — KPMG Advisory v Commission
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, sanction (EU), tendering








C_2023045EN.01003701.xml










6.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/37






Order of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — KPMG Advisory v Commission
(Case T-614/21) (1)

(2023/C 45/62)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 481, 29.11.2021.
Case T-440/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — TM v ECB (Civil service — ECB staff — Recruitment — Vacancy notice — Procedure for filling a post of [confidential information redacted] — Selection criteria — Professional experience — Rejection of application — Appointment of another candidate — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Misuse of powers — Interests of the service — Liability — Material and non-material damage)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, administrator, appointment of members, competition (EU), damages, job vacancy, professional experience, recruitment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2023063EN.01004002.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/40






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — TM v ECB
(Case T-440/21) (1)

(Civil service - ECB staff - Recruitment - Vacancy notice - Procedure for filling a post of [confidential information redacted] - Selection criteria - Professional experience - Rejection of application - Appointment of another candidate - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of powers - Interests of the service - Liability - Material and non-material damage)
(2023/C 63/50)
Language of the case: English

Parties


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

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: B. Ehlers and D. Nessaf, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the applicant seeks (i) annulment of the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 15 December 2020 not to appoint him to the position of [confidential information redacted] but to appoint [confidential information redacted] to that position, and (ii) compensation for the material and non-material damage which he claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders TM to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 391, 27.9.2021.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 December 2022 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an instrument for providing support to Ukraine for 2023 (macro-financial assistance +) (15727/2022 — C9-0424/2022 — 2022/0371(COD))
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, EU loan, European neighbourhood policy, Russia, Ukraine, economic reform, economic stabilisation, fund (EU), macro-financial assistance, territorial dispute








C_2023177EN.01014401.xml










17.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 177/144






P9_TA(2022)0439
‘Macro-Financial Assistance+’ instrument for providing support to Ukraine for 2023
European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 December 2022 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an instrument for providing support to Ukraine for 2023 (macro-financial assistance +) (15727/2022 — C9-0424/2022 — 2022/0371(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)
(2023/C 177/22)

The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the Council position at first reading (15727/2022 — C9-0424/2022),










—


having regard to its position at first reading (1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2022)0597),










—


having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to Rules 67 and 163 of its Rules of Procedure,












1.


Approves the Council position at first reading;












2.


Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;












3.


Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;












4.


Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;












5.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.






(1)  Texts adopted, 24.11.2022, P9_TA(2022)0412.
Case T-358/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Hotel Cipriani v EUIPO — Altunis (CIPRIANI FOOD) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark CIPRIANI FOOD — Genuine use of a mark — Nature of use — Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Extent of use — Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal product, condiment, egg, foodstuff, meat product, milk, prepared foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023063EN.01004001.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/40






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Hotel Cipriani v EUIPO — Altunis (CIPRIANI FOOD)
(Case T-358/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark CIPRIANI FOOD - Genuine use of a mark - Nature of use - Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Extent of use - Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2023/C 63/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Hotel Cipriani SpA (Venice, Italy) (represented by: M. Rieger-Jansen, D. Op de Beeck and W. Pors, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Sociedade unipessoal, Lda (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: M. Pomares Caballero, E. Salis and T. Barber Giner, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 April 2021 (Case R 1599/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Hotel Cipriani SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred, in connection with the present proceedings, by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Altunis-Trading, Gestão e Serviços, Sociedade unipessoal, Lda.






(1)  OJ C 338, 23.8.2021.
Case T-296/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — SU v EIOPA (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Contract for a fixed period — Non-renewal — Renewal procedure — Taking into account of appraisal reports — Non-finalised appraisal report — Liability — Material damage — Loss of opportunity — Non-material damage — Unlimited jurisdiction — Implementation of a judgment of the General Court)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, servant (EU), staff assessment, temporary employment, termination of employment, work contract








C_2023063EN.01003701.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/37






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — SU v EIOPA
(Case T-296/21) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Contract for a fixed period - Non-renewal - Renewal procedure - Taking into account of appraisal reports - Non-finalised appraisal report - Liability - Material damage - Loss of opportunity - Non-material damage - Unlimited jurisdiction - Implementation of a judgment of the General Court)
(2023/C 63/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: SU (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) (represented by: C. Coucke and E. Karatza, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) of 15 July 2020 by which the latter did not renew her contract and, so far as necessary, of the decision of 11 February 2021 by which it rejected her complaint and, secondly, compensation for the material and non-material damage she claims to have suffered as a result.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) of 15 July 2020 not to renew SU’s contract as a member of the temporary staff;










2.


Annuls the decision of EIOPA of 11 February 2021 rejecting SU’s complaint;










3.


Orders EIOPA to pay EUR 10 000 as compensation for the material damage sustained by SU;










4.


Orders EIOPA to pay EUR 5 000 as compensation for the non-material damage sustained by SU;










5.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










6.


Orders EIOPA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 320, 9.8.2021.
Case T-46/22: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Esedra v Parliament (Public service contracts — Tender procedure — Full management of the Parliament’s early childhood centre in Brussels — Rejection of a tenderer’s tender — Abnormally low tender — Compliance of a tender with the conditions laid down in the specifications — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest errors of assessment)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, Brussels region, European Parliament, award of contract, child care, damages, nursery school, services contract, tendering








C_2023063EN.01004402.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/44






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Esedra v Parliament
(Case T-46/22) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Full management of the Parliament’s early childhood centre in Brussels - Rejection of a tenderer’s tender - Abnormally low tender - Compliance of a tender with the conditions laid down in the specifications - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest errors of assessment)
(2023/C 63/56)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Esedra (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Vastmans, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Pencheva and M. Kazek, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action, the applicant seeks, first, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, annulment of the decision of the European Parliament of 26 November 2021, entitled ‘Procédure de passation de marché PE PERS 2021 027 — Gestion complète de la structure d’accueil petite enfance du Parlement européen à Bruxelles, sise rue Wayenberg’(Procurement procedure PE PERS 2021 027 — Full management of the European Parliament’s early childhood centre in Brussels, located on Rue Wayenberg), rejecting the tender submitted by it in the context of the call for tenders and awarding the contract to another tenderer, and, second, on the basis of Article 268 TFEU, compensation for the damage which it has suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Esedra to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief.






(1)  OJ C 109, 7.3.2022.
Case T-138/20: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — PT Ciliandra Perkasa v Commission (Subsidies — Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 — Definitive countervailing duty — Article 8(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 — Price undercutting — Price pressure — Article 8(5) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Causal link — Article 3(2) and Article 6(d) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 3(1)(a)(i) and (2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Direct transfer of funds — Article 7 of Regulation 2016/1037 — Calculation of the amount of the benefit — Article 8(1) and (8) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Threat of material injury — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2022-12-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Indonesia, biofuel, countervailing charge, import (EU), originating product, rights of the defence








C_2023063EN.01003201.xml










20.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/32






Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — PT Ciliandra Perkasa v Commission
(Case T-138/20) (1)

(Subsidies - Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 - Definitive countervailing duty - Article 8(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 - Price undercutting - Price pressure - Article 8(5) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Causal link - Article 3(2) and Article 6(d) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Benefit - Article 3(1)(a)(i) and (2) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Direct transfer of funds - Article 7 of Regulation 2016/1037 - Calculation of the amount of the benefit - Article 8(1) and (8) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Threat of material injury - Rights of the defence)
(2023/C 63/39)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: PT Ciliandra Perkasa (West Jakarta, Indonesia) (represented by: F. Graafsma, J. Cornelis and E. Rogiest, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Kienapfel, G. Luengo and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M.-S. Dibling and L. Amiel, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 of 28 November 2019 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia (OJ 2019 L 317, p. 42), in so far as that regulation concerns it.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders PT Ciliandra Perkasa to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.