do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-205/23, Engie România: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul București (Romania) lodged on 28 March 2023 — Engie România SA v Autoritatea Națională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative offence, administrative sanction, consumer protection, free price, gas supply, natural gas, price of energy, price regulations, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2023252EN.01001801.xml










17.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul București (Romania) lodged on 28 March 2023 — Engie România SA v Autoritatea Națională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei
(Case C-205/23, Engie România)
(2023/C 252/20)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul București

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Engie România SA

Respondent: Autoritatea Națională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei

Questions referred







1.


Can an alleged breach of the duty of transparency incumbent on natural gas suppliers in their dealings with household consumers, which has been implemented in national legislation and is treated under that legislation as an administrative offence (contravenția), also result in the competent national authority’s requiring a natural gas supplier to apply, in dealings with consumers, a price imposed by administrative means that takes no account of the principle of freedom to fix prices in the natural gas market, that principle being established by Article 3(1) of Directive 2009/73/EC? (1)











2.


Can the fact that a natural gas supplier has been fined both by the consumer protection authority and by the energy sector regulatory authority, by means of two separate reports of offences imposing the same measures on the supplier (duplication of administrative acts imposing measures), be regarded as a justified restriction of the principle ne bis in idem, under the provisions of Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, or is it a breach of that principle?
Does such a combination of acts imposing the same measures on the basis of the same facts, drawn up by different authorities, comply with the principle of proportionality?






(1)  Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC (OJ 2009 L 211, p. 94).
Case T-165/23: Action brought on 28 March 2023 — Arkema France v Commission
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European industrial area, Indonesia, anti-dumping duty, equal treatment, import (EU), organic acid, originating product








C_2023179EN.01006701.xml










22.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/67






Action brought on 28 March 2023 — Arkema France v Commission
(Case T-165/23)
(2023/C 179/93)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Arkema France (Colombes, France) (represented by: S. Dumon-Kappe and D. Todorova, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


hold that the present action is admissible and well founded;
consequently,










—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/111 of 18 January 2023 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of fatty acid originating in Indonesia;










—


in any event, order the Commission to pay all the costs.





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 infringement of Article 9(1) and Article 21(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union. That plea is divided into three parts.






—


According to the first part, the defendant, by deciding to pursue the investigation on imports of fatty acids originating in Indonesia despite the withdrawal of the complaint, did not take all the interests of the European Union or the opposition of various European players into account.










—


According to the second part, the defendant, by deciding to introduce definitive anti-dumping duties applicable to imports of fatty acids originating in Indonesia, committed a manifest error of assessment of the users’ interests.










—


According to the third part, the Commission, by refusing to terminate the anti-dumping investigation without imposing measures, breached the general principles of equal treatment and legitimate expectations.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 1(1) and Article 3(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union.






—


The applicant argues, in that regard, that the defendant overestimated the negative impact on the EU industry of imports of fatty acids originating in Indonesia, which have not caused any material harm to the European industry.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 27 March 2023 2023/C 113/06
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2023113EN.01000601.xml










28.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/6







Euro exchange rates (1)


            27 March 2023
         
(2023/C 113/06)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0773 




JPY


Japanese yen


141,64 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4515 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87818 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,2120 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9875 




ISK


Iceland króna


149,90 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,3380 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


23,732 




HUF


Hungarian forint


385,30 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6855 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9405 




TRY


Turkish lira


20,5701 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6204 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4769 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4566 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7397 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4351 




KRW


South Korean won


1 400,23 




ZAR


South African rand


19,7373 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4131 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 319,16 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7633 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,347 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,070 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,6362 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,8128 




INR


Indian rupee


88,6672 






(1)  
            Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10860 – ADVENT / GfK) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 113/12
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, market research, merger control, provision of services








C_2023113EN.01002901.xml










28.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/29







Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10860 – ADVENT / GfK)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 113/12)


1.   
On 20 March 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:






—


NielsenIQ (‘NIQ’, United States), controlled by Advent International (‘Advent’, United States),










—


GfK SE (‘GfK’, Germany).




Advent, indirectly through NIQ, will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of GfK.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


NIQ is active in the provision of market research services worldwide. NIQ is controlled by Advent, a private equity investor headquartered in the United States,










—


GfK is active in the provision of market research services worldwide.






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.



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.10860 – ADVENT / GfK
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’).
Council Decision (EU) 2023/703 of 28 March 2023 appointing a member, proposed by Ireland, of the European Economic and Social Committee
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Economic and Social Committee, Ireland, appointment of members








L_2023092EN.01001501.xml










30.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 92/15








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2023/703
of 28 March 2023
         
appointing a member, proposed by Ireland, of the European Economic and Social Committee


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 302 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision (EU) 2019/853 of 21 May 2019 determining the composition of the European Economic and Social Committee (1),


Having regard to the proposal of the Government of Ireland,


After consulting the European Commission,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 300(2) of the Treaty, the Economic and Social Committee is to consist of representatives of organisations of employers, of the employed, and of other parties representative of civil society, notably in socioeconomic, civic, professional and cultural areas.












(2)


On 2 October 2020, the Council adopted Decision (EU) 2020/1392 (2), appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2020 to 20 September 2025.












(3)


A member’s seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the resignation of Ms Mary DOYLE.












(4)


The Government of Ireland has proposed Mr Neil WALKER, Head of Infrastructure, Energy and Environment, Irish Business and Employers Confederation (IBEC), as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2025,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Mr Neil WALKER, Head of Infrastructure, Energy and Environment, Irish Business and Employers Confederation (IBEC), is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2025.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 28 March 2023.


For the Council


The President

E. BUSCH
            





(1)  
            OJ L 139, 27.5.2019, p. 15.

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2020/1392 of 2 October 2020 appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period from 21 September 2020 to 20 September 2025, and repealing and replacing the Council Decision appointing the members of the European Economic and Social Committee for the period 21 September 2020 to 20 September 2025 adopted on 18 September 2020 (OJ L 322, 5.10.2020, p. 1).
Case C-204/23, Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche and Others: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 28 March 2023 — Autorità di regolazione dei trasporti v Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche and Others
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airport, charges for use of infrastructure, financing, supervisory power








C_2023189EN.01002402.xml










30.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/24






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 28 March 2023 — Autorità di regolazione dei trasporti v Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche and Others
(Case C-204/23, Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche and Others)
(2023/C 189/32)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Autorità di regolazione dei trasporti

Respondents: Lufthansa Linee Aeree Germaniche, Austrian Airlines AG, Brussels Airlines SA/NV, Swiss International Air Lines Ltd, Lufthansa Cargo AG

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 11(5) of Directive 2009/12/EC (1) — a legislative act relating to the airport sector — be interpreted as meaning that the funding of the Authority must be carried out only by means of levying airport charges, or may it not also be carried out by means of other forms of funding such as levying a financial contribution (the present Chamber finds that collecting the sums intended to fund the Authority by means of levying airport charges is merely an option for Member States)?










2.


Must the charges or the financial contribution which may be levied for the funding of the supervisory authority pursuant to Article 11(5) of Directive 2009/12/EC relate only to specific services and costs — which, in any event, are not referred to in the Directive — or is their correlation to the Authority’s operating costs as resulting from the financial statements submitted to and audited by the public authorities not sufficient?










3.


Must Article 11(5) of Directive 2009/12/EC be interpreted as meaning that charges may be levied only on persons resident or incorporated under the law of the State which established the Authority, and can this also apply in the case of financial contributions levied for the operation of the Authority?






(1)  Directive 2009/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on airport charges (OJ 2009 L 70, p. 11).
Corrigendum to Public holidays 2023 (Official Journal of the European Union C 39 of 1 February 2023) 2023/C 113/14
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, public holiday








C_2023113EN.01003701.xml










28.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 113/37







Corrigendum to Public holidays 2023

(
Official Journal of the European Union C 39 of 1 February 2023
)

(2023/C 113/14)

On page 20 in row 3:
for:






Česká republika


1.1, 15.4, 18.4, 1.5, 8.5, 5.7, 6.7, 28.9, 28.10, 17.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




read:






Česká republika


1.1, 7.4, 10.4, 1.5, 8.5, 5.7, 6.7, 28.9, 28.10, 17.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/732 of 28 March 2023 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Aceite de Madrid’ (PDO))
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Community of Madrid, Spain, designation of origin, labelling, olive oil, product designation








L_2023095EN.01004101.xml










4.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 95/41








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2023/732
of 28 March 2023
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Aceite de Madrid’ (PDO))


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, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Aceite de Madrid’ 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 ‘Aceite de Madrid’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Aceite de Madrid’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.5. – Oils and fats, 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, 28 March 2023.


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 478, 16.12.2022, p. 24.

(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 T-166/23: Action brought on 28 March 2023 — Dekoback v EUIPO — DecoPac (DECOPAC)
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, decorative item, pastry-making, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023173EN.01004001.xml










15.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 173/40






Action brought on 28 March 2023 — Dekoback v EUIPO — DecoPac (DECOPAC)
(Case T-166/23)
(2023/C 173/52)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Dekoback GmbH (Helmstadt-Bargen, Germany) (represented by: V. von Moers, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: DecoPac, Inc. (Anoka, Minnesota, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark DECOPAC — EU word mark No 160 747

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 January 2023 in Case R 754/2022-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


cancel in full trade mark No 160 747 DECOPAC registered for the other party to the proceedings, DecoPac, Inc.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 52 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10796 – GOOGLE / PHOTOMATH)
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: advertising, cloud computing, computer applications, computer equipment, economic concentration, education, merger control, search engine, software








C_202300101EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/101


3.10.2023






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10796 – GOOGLE / PHOTOMATH)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2023/101)

On 28 March 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 (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). 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 32023M10796. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  
            OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/101/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-202/23, Baabda and Others: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Minden (Germany) lodged on 28 March 2023 — M.E.O. v Federal Republic of Germany
Date: 2023-03-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, international protection, right of asylum








C_2023261EN.01000403.xml










24.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 261/4






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Minden (Germany) lodged on 28 March 2023 — M.E.O. v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-202/23, Baabda and Others (1))
(2023/C 261/10)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Minden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: M.E.O.

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 33(2)(d) of Directive 2013/32/EU (2) in conjunction with Article 2(q) thereof to be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State under which an application for international protection made in that Member State is to be rejected as inadmissible if the applicant previously made an application for international protection in another Member State and the procedure was discontinued by the other Member State because the applicant abandoned the application in that Member State?










2.


If Question 1 is to be answered in the negative:
Is Article 33(2)(d) of Directive 2013/32 in conjunction with Article 2(q) thereof to be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State under which an application for international protection made in that Member State is to be rejected as inadmissible if the applicant previously made an application for international protection in another Member State and the procedure was discontinued by the other Member State because the applicant abandoned the application in the other Member State, even though the asylum procedure in the other Member State can still be reopened by the other Member State if the applicant makes an application to that effect in the other Member State?










3.


If Question 2 is to be answered in the affirmative:
Does EU law stipulate what is the relevant date, in connection with the decision on an application for international protection, for determining whether an asylum procedure previously discontinued in another Member State can still be reopened or is this a matter governed solely by national law?










4.


If Question 3 is to be answered to the effect that EU law does contain such stipulations:
What is the relevant date under EU law, in connection with the decision on an application for international protection, for determining whether an asylum procedure previously discontinued in another Member State can still be reopened?






(1)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

(2)  Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60).