do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 17 April 2023 2023/C 135/02
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2023135EN.01000901.xml










18.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/9






Euro exchange rates (1)

17 April 2023
(2023/C 135/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0981 




JPY


Japanese yen


146,97 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4520 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88373 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,3163 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9812 




ISK


Iceland króna


149,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,3640 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


23,345 




HUF


Hungarian forint


371,70 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6288 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9425 




TRY


Turkish lira


21,2835 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6356 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4673 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6200 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7717 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4615 




KRW


South Korean won


1 444,13 




ZAR


South African rand


19,8937 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,5433 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 299,22 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8558 




PHP


Philippine peso


61,449 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,753 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,3861 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,7526 




INR


Indian rupee


90,0607 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-241/23, Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Warszawie: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 18 April 2023 — P. sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Warszawie
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, economic value, price of securities, share, supply








C_2023252EN.01002601.xml










17.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/26






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 18 April 2023 — P. sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Warszawie
(Case C-241/23, Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Warszawie)
(2023/C 252/30)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: P. sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Warszawie

Question referred

Is consideration obtained or to be obtained by the supplier in return for a supply of goods, as referred to in Article 73 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, (1) to be understood as meaning the nominal value of the shares acquired or the issue value, if the parties have stipulated that the consideration is to be the issue value of the shares?


(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 135/03
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical compound, chemical product, chromium, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, metal coating, plastics








C_2023135EN.01001001.xml










18.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/10






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)


(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 135/03)

Decision granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2023) 2259


11 April 2023


Chromium trioxide
EC No. 215-607-8, CAS No. 1333-82-0


Oras Oy, Isometsäntie 2, 26100 Rauma, Finland


REACH/23/11/0


Electroplating of metal and plastic substrates using chromium trioxide to achieve functional surfaces for sanitary applications


31 December 2028


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.




Oras Olesno Sp. z o.o, Lesna 2 46-300 Olesno, Poland


REACH/23/11/1




Oras Oy, Isometsäntie 2, 26100 Rauma, Finland


REACH/23/11/2


Pre-treatment (‘etching’) of plastic substrates using chromium trioxide for electroplating processes in sanitary applications






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu).
Case C-242/23, Tecno*37: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2023 — Tecno*37 v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Bologna
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, broker, conflict of interest, infringement of EU law, property market, real property








C_2023252EN.01002701.xml










17.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/27






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2023 — Tecno*37 v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Bologna
(Case C-242/23, Tecno*37)
(2023/C 252/31)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tecno*37

Defendant: Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Bologna

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 5(3) of Law 39/1989 as reworded following infringement proceeding No 2018/2175 now be regarded as fully consistent with [EU] law, in particular in the light of the closure of the infringement proceeding itself?










2.


Do the principles and objectives of Article 59(3) of Directive 2005/36/EC (1) (as amended by Directive 2013/55/[EU] (2)) and Article 25(1) of Directive 2006/123/EC (3) and, more generally, of Article 49 TFEU preclude rules such as the Italian rule contained in Article 5(3) of Law No 39/1989, which establishes, as a preventive and general provision, incompatibility between property brokerage activity and property management activity due to the mere fact that the two activities are carried out jointly and, therefore, without there being any need for chambers of commerce to subsequently ascertain on a case-by-case basis the nature of the brokerage carried out, without this being based on a specifically identified and proved ‘overriding reason in the public interest’ or, in any event, on a demonstration of the proportionality of the general incompatibility provided for with regard to the objective pursued?










3.


Can a property agent in any case also act as a property manager, provided he or she does not seek to sell or purchase the property he or she manages since a conflict of interest would arise in this case?






(1)  Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22).

(2)  Directive 2013/55/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 amending Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications and Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System (‘the IMI Regulation’) (OJ 2013 L 354, p. 132).

(3)  Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 36).
Case C-248/23, Novo Nordisk: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 18 April 2023 — Novo Nordisk AS v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, health insurance, pharmaceutical industry, tax law, tax relief, taxable income








C_2023235EN.01002001.xml










3.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/20






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 18 April 2023 — Novo Nordisk AS v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
(Case C-248/23, Novo Nordisk)
(2023/C 235/24)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Novo Nordisk AS

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

Question referred

Must Article 90(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) be interpreted as precluding the national legislation at issue in the main proceedings, under which a pharmaceutical company which makes payments ex lege to the State health insurance agency based on the revenue obtained from publicly funded pharmaceutical products is not entitled subsequently to reduce the taxable amount, by reason of the fact that the payments are made ex lege, that payments made under a funding volume agreement and investments made by the company in research and development in the health sector may be deducted from the base amount for the payment obligation, and that the amount payable is collected by the State tax authority, which immediately transfers it to the State health insurance agency?


(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case C-672/22, DKV: Order of the President of the Court of 18 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Koblenz — Germany) — BZ v DKV Deutsche Krankenversicherung AG
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data protection, data-processing law, health insurance, personal data, reprography








C_2023286EN.01002403.xml










14.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 286/24






Order of the President of the Court of 18 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Koblenz — Germany) — BZ v DKV Deutsche Krankenversicherung AG
(Case C-672/22, (1) DKV)
(2023/C 286/31)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 45, 6.2.2023.
Case C-243/23, Drebers: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Gent (Belgium) lodged on 18 April 2023 — Belgian State / Federale Overheidsdienst Financiën v L BV
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, amortisation, building, capital goods, improvement of housing, taxpayer








C_2023261EN.01000901.xml










24.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 261/9






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Gent (Belgium) lodged on 18 April 2023 — Belgian State / Federale Overheidsdienst Financiën v L BV
(Case C-243/23, Drebers (1))
(2023/C 261/15)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Beroep te Gent

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Belgian State / Federale Overheidsdienst Financiën

Defendant: L BV

Questions referred







1.


Do Articles 187 and 189 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (2) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax preclude legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings (namely Article 48(2) and Article 49 WBTW, read in conjunction with Article 9 KB No 3 of 10 December 1969, relating to the deduction facility for the application of value added tax), according to which the extended adjustment period (of 15 years) in the case of the renovation of an existing building is applied only if, after completion of the works, on the basis of the criteria under national law, there is a ‘new building’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the aforementioned Directive, whereas the useful economic life of a substantially renovated building (which, however, on the basis of the administrative criteria under national law does not qualify as a ‘new building’ within the meaning of the aforementioned Article 12) is identical to the useful economic life of a new building, which is considerably longer than the period of five years referred to in the aforementioned Article 187, which is shown, inter alia, by the fact that the works carried out are depreciated over a period of 33 years, which is also the period over which new buildings are depreciated?










2.


Does Article 187 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax have direct effect, so that a taxable person who has carried out works on a building without those works leading to the renovated building being classified as a ‘new building’ within the meaning of Article 12 of that directive on the basis of criteria under national law, but where those works have a useful economic life which is identical to that of such new buildings to which a 15-year adjustment period does apply, may rely on the application of the 15-year adjustment period?






(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)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.)) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 135/04
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical compound, chemical product, chromium, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, metal coating, plastics








C_2023135EN.01001101.xml










18.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/11






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 135/04)

Decision granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2023) 2321


11 April 2023


Chromium trioxide
EC No. 215-607-8, CAS No. 1333-82-0


Viega GmbH & Co. KG, Bielefelder Strasse 94, 57368 Lennestadt Elspe, Germany


REACH/23/10/0


Electroplating of different types of substrates using chromium trioxide to achieve functional surfaces with high durability and a bright silvery appearance for sanitary applications


31 December 2028


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.




REACH/23/10/1


Etching of plastics with chromium trioxide as pre-treatment step for electroplating processes for sanitary applications






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu).
Case T-202/23: Action brought on 18 April 2023 — Kivikoski and Others v Council
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: assistant, equal treatment, pay scale, promotion, staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2023205EN.01003901.xml










12.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/39






Action brought on 18 April 2023 — Kivikoski and Others v Council
(Case T-202/23)
(2023/C 205/44)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Ville Kivikoski (Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium), Ottavia Maffia (Brussels, Belgium), Peter Pristovnik (Brussels) (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 13 July 2022;










—


annul, in so far as necessary, to the extent that it states the reasons on which the decision of 13 July 2022 is based, the decision to reject the complaint dated 2 February 2023;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of their action against the decision of the Secretary General of the Council of 13 July 2022 not to promote them for the 2022 promotion exercise, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging the unlawfulness of the contested decision in so far as it is based on an incorrect application of the statutory rules and rates applicable to promotion, which infringes the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and caused a reasonable loss of opportunity for them to be eligible to promotion to grade AST 8.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a breach of the principles of foreseeability and legal certainty, and due to the fact that they have suffered unlawful unequal treatment, based on their classification to grade AST 7, not provided for by the legislature.
Case C-200/22, Vantage Logistics: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia — Romania) — Vantage Logistics SRL v Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Alba, Auto Help Alba SRL, Banca Transilvania SA, BRD — Groupe Société Générale SA, SC Croma SRL, SC Polaris M.Holding, SC Elit România Piese Auto Originale SRL (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Insolvency proceedings — Restructuring plan — Directive (EU) 2019/1023 — Applicability ratione temporis and ratione materiae — Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, financial solvency, industrial reorganisation, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, ownership, primacy of EU law








C_2023286EN.01001301.xml










14.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 286/13






Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia — Romania) — Vantage Logistics SRL v Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Alba, Auto Help Alba SRL, Banca Transilvania SA, BRD — Groupe Société Générale SA, SC Croma SRL, SC Polaris M.Holding, SC Elit România Piese Auto Originale SRL
(Case C-200/22, (1) Vantage Logistics)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Insolvency proceedings - Restructuring plan - Directive (EU) 2019/1023 - Applicability ratione temporis and ratione materiae - Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
(2023/C 286/14)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Vantage Logistics SRL

Defendants: Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Alba, Auto Help Alba SRL, Banca Transilvania SA, BRD — Groupe Société Générale SA, SC Croma SRL, SC Polaris M.Holding, SC Elit România Piese Auto Originale SRL

Interveners: SC Nedo Auto Service SRL, CH Insolvency IPURL, acting as insolvency administrator for SC Nedo Auto Service SRL

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly lacks jurisdiction to answer the question referred for a preliminary ruling by the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia (Court of Appeal, Alba Iulia, Romania), by the decision of 22 February 2022.


(1)  OJ C 222, 7.6.2022.
Case C-247/23, Deldits: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 18 April 2023 — VP v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság
Date: 2023-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to information, data protection, data-processing law, disclosure of information, distribution by sex, natural person, personal data, protection of privacy








C_2023235EN.01001901.xml










3.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 18 April 2023 — VP v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság
(Case C-247/23, Deldits (1))
(2023/C 235/23)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: VP

Defendant: Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 16 of the GDPR (2) be interpreted as meaning that, in connection with the exercise of the rights of the data subject, the authority responsible for keeping registers under national law is required to rectify the personal data relating to the sex of that data subject recorded by that authority, where those data have changed after they were entered in the register and therefore do not comply with the principle of accuracy established in Article 5(1)(d) of the GDPR?










2.


If the answer to the first question referred is in the affirmative, must Article 16 of the GDPR be interpreted as meaning that it requires the person requesting rectification of the data relating to his or her sex to provide evidence in support of the request for rectification?










3.


If the answer to the second question referred is in the affirmative, must Article 16 of the GDPR be interpreted as meaning that the person making the request is required to prove that he or she has undergone sex reassignment surgery?






(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)  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) (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).