do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-95/23 P: Appeal brought on 17 February 2023 by the European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 8 December 2022 in Case T-769/21, Euranimi v Commission
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, Taiwan, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, plate, steel








C_2023127EN.01002701.xml










11.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 127/27






Appeal brought on 17 February 2023 by the European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 8 December 2022 in Case T-769/21, Euranimi v Commission
(Case C-95/23 P)
(2023/C 127/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: European Association of Non-Integrated Metal Importers & distributors (Euranimi) (represented by: V. Villante, D. Rovetta, M. Campa, avvocati, P. Gjørtler, advokat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The Appellant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present appeal admissible;










—


set aside the order under appeal and declare the action brought by EURANIMI admissible;










—


send the case back to the General Court for examination of the substance of EURANIMI’s action;










—


order the European Commission to bear the legal cost of the present appeal and of the procedure at first instance.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellant relies on three main grounds of appeals:

First ground of appeal: Error in law in interpreting the Article 263 (4) TFEU and in particular the requisite of ‘direct and individual concern’. Wrong qualification of facts.

Second ground of appeal: Error in law in interpreting the final limb of Article 263 (4) TFEU and the requisite and notion of regulatory act which does not entail implementing measures. Wrong qualification of facts and distortion of evidence.

Third ground of appeal: Wrong qualification of facts and distortion of evidence.
Case T-78/23: Action brought on 17 February 2023 — Google v EUIPO — EPay (GPAY)
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic money, payment, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2023121EN.01001401.xml










3.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/14






Action brought on 17 February 2023 — Google v EUIPO — EPay (GPAY)
(Case T-78/23)
(2023/C 121/19)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Google LLC (Mountain View, California, United States) (represented by: C. Schmitt and M. Kinkeldey, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: EPay AD (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark GPAY — Application for registration No 18 138 507

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 November 2022 in Case R 1761/2021-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and, the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal if it joins as intervener, to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10973 – VODAFONE GROUP / ALTICE LUXEMBOURG / FIBRECO) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 86/03
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: advertising, digital content, economic concentration, holding company, mass media, merger control, provision of services, telecommunications, wholesale trade








C_2023086EN.01000301.xml










8.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 86/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10973 – VODAFONE GROUP / ALTICE LUXEMBOURG / FIBRECO)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 86/03)
On 17 February 2023, 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 32023M10973. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11024 – GEODIS INTERNATIONAL / TRANS-O-FLEX EXPRESS) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 105/02
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, economic concentration, inland transport, international transport, logistics, merger control








C_2023105EN.01000201.xml










21.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 105/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11024 – GEODIS INTERNATIONAL / TRANS-O-FLEX EXPRESS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 105/02)
On 17 February 2023, 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 32023M11024. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Notice for the attention of certain persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran 2023/C 60/04
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Iran, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, natural person








C_2023060EN.01000601.xml










17.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 60/6






Notice for the attention of certain persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran
(2023/C 60/04)
The following information is brought to the attention of SOLTANI Hodjatoleslam Seyed Mohammad (no. 17), JAFARI-DOLATABADI Abbas (no. 19), MOHSENI-EJEI Gholam-Hossein (no. 21), SALAVATI Abdolghassem (no. 25), JAVANI Yadollah (no. 43), HAJMOHAM-MADI Aziz (a.k.a. Aziz Hajmohammadi, Noorollah Azizmohammadi) (no. 57), BAGHERI Mohammad-Bagher (no. 58), HOSSEINI Dr Seyyed Mohammad (a.k.a. HOSSEYNI Dr Seyyed Mohammad; Seyed, Sayyed and Sayyid) (no. 60), MIRHEJAZI Ali Ashgar (no. 66), MORTAZAVI Seyyed Solat (no. 69), JAFARI Reza (no. 77), MOUSSAVI Seyed Mohammad Bagher (a.k.a. MOUSAVI Sayed Mohammed Baqir) (no. 81), JAFARI Asadollah (no. 83), EMADI Hamid Reza (a.k.a. Hamidreza Emadi) (no. 84), ASHTARI Hossein (no. 92), VASEGHI Leyla (a.k.a. VASEQI Layla, VASEGHI Leila, VASEGHI Layla) (no. 95), Evin Prison (no. 2), Fashafouyeh Prison (a.k.a. Greater Tehran Central Penitentiary, Hasanabad-e Qom Prison, Greater Tehran Prison) (no. 3), Rajaee Shahr Prison (a.k.a. Rajai Shahr Prison, Rajaishahr, Raja’i Shahr, Reja’i Shahr, Rajayi Shahr, Gorhardasht Prison, Gohar Dasht Prison) (no. 4), persons and entities appearing in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP (1) and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran.
The Council intends to maintain the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned persons and entities with new statements of reasons. Those persons and entities are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statements of reasons for their designation, before 24 February 2023, to the following address:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




RELEX.1 Global and Horizontal Affairs




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu.
Any observations received before 10 March 2023 will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council's periodic review, in accordance with Article 3 of Decision 2011/235/CFSP and Article 12(4) of Regulation (EU) No 359/2011.


(1)  OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 51.

(2)  OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 1.
Publication of a vacancy for the function of Director for Digital Transformation (DIGIT.A) in the Directorate-General for Informatics (grade AD 14), Brussels COM/2023/10425 2023/C 60/15
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Human Resources and Security, European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, Brussels region, administrator, competition (EU), digital transformation, job vacancy, managing director, recruitment








C_2023060EN.01002701.xml










17.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 60/27






Publication of a vacancy for the function of Director for Digital Transformation (DIGIT.A) in the Directorate-General for Informatics (grade AD 14), Brussels
COM/2023/10425
(2023/C 60/15)
The European Commission has published a vacancy notice (reference COM/2023/10425) for the function of Director for Digital Transformation (DIGIT.A) in the Directorate-General for Informatics (grade AD 14).
To consult the text of the vacancy notice in 24 languages and to submit your application, please visit this dedicated webpage on the European Commission’s website: https://europa.eu/!hD8fNd
Case T-84/23: Action brought on 17 February 2023 — Data Protection Commission v European Data Protection Board
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: data protection, data-processing law, personal data, powers of the institutions (EU), social media, supervisory body








C_2023127EN.01005301.xml










11.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 127/53






Action brought on 17 February 2023 — Data Protection Commission v European Data Protection Board
(Case T-84/23)
(2023/C 127/64)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Data Protection Commission (represented by: D. Young, A. Bateman and R. Minch, Solicitors, B. Kennelly, SC, D. Fennelly and E. Synnott, Barristers)

Defendant: European Data Protection Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the second lines of paragraphs 203 and 454 of Binding Decision 4/2022 of the European Data Protection Board (the ‘EDPB’) on the dispute submitted by the Irish SA pursuant to Article 65 GDPR on Meta Platforms Ireland Limited and its Instagram service;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the 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 EDPB exceeded its competence under Article 65(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council (GDPR) (1) in purporting to instruct the Data Protection Commission (the ‘DPC’) to: (i) carry out a new investigation, and (ii) issue a new draft decision in accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the EDPB infringed Article 4(24) GDPR and Article 65(1)(a) GDPR by incorrectly interpreting those provisions as conferring a competence on the EDPB to instruct the DPC to: (i) carry out a new investigation, and (ii) issue a new draft decision in accordance with Article 60(3) GDPR.






(1)  Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11011 – EQT / TRESCAL) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 60/19
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment, investment company, merger control, provision of services, quality control of industrial products, testing








C_2023060EN.01003401.xml










17.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 60/34






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11011 – EQT / TRESCAL)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 60/19)

1.   
On 9 February 2023, 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:






—


EQT Fund Management S.à r.l. (‘EFMS’, Luxembourg), controlled by EQT AB (‘EQT’, Sweden);










—


Talbot International SAS (‘Trescal’, France).




EFMS will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Trescal.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


EFMS acts as the fund manager for and on behalf of a certain EQT fund that controls and that invests in infrastructure businesses primarily in Europe and North America;










—


Trescal, through its group of companies, is active within testing, inspection and certification services, primarily calibration services, to customers in, inter alia, the aerospace, defence, energy and industrial, automotive and transport, life sciences, electronics, telecom and food and beverage sectors.






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.11011 – EQT / TRESCAL
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
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.
Case T-79/23: Action brought on 17 February 2023 — Chiquita Brands v EUIPO — Jara 2000 (CHIQUITA QUEEN)
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fresh fruit, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023121EN.01001501.xml










3.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/15






Action brought on 17 February 2023 — Chiquita Brands v EUIPO — Jara 2000 (CHIQUITA QUEEN)
(Case T-79/23)
(2023/C 121/20)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Chiquita Brands LLC (Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States) (represented by: R. Dissmann and L. Jones, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Jara 2000, SL (Murcia, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark CHIQUITA QUEEN — Application for registration No 18 075 274

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 December 2022 in Case R 1811/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the appellant’s costs incurred in the proceedings before EUIPO.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-653/20: Order of the General Court of 17 February 2023 — Mylan Ireland v EMA
Date: 2023-02-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: drug surveillance, generic drug, innovation, market approval, marketing standard








C_2023127EN.01006002.xml










11.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 127/60






Order of the General Court of 17 February 2023 — Mylan Ireland v EMA
(Case T-653/20) (1)

(2023/C 127/75)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.