do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-508/23, Consorcio Gallego de Servicios de Igualdad y Bienestar: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia (Spain) lodged on 8 August 2023 — KP v Consorcio Gallego de Servicios de Igualdad y Bienestar
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, full-time employment, labour law, public service employee, recruitment, temporary employment, work contract








C_202301434EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/1434


18.12.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia (Spain) lodged on 8 August 2023 — KP v Consorcio Gallego de Servicios de Igualdad y Bienestar
(Case C-508/23, Consorcio Gallego de Servicios de Igualdad y Bienestar)
(C/2023/1434)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: KP

Defendant: Consorcio Gallego de Servicios de Igualdad y Bienestar

Questions referred

The questions referred for a preliminary ruling are identical to those in Case C-434/23.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1434/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-510/23, Trenitalia: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Trenitalia SpA v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU competition policy, administrative procedure, consumer protection, restriction on competition








C_202300206EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/206


23.10.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Trenitalia SpA v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato
(Case C-510/23, Trenitalia)
(C/2023/206)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Trenitalia SpA

Defendant: Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato

Question referred

Must Article 11 of Directive 2005/29/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005, read in the light of the principles of consumer protection and effectiveness of administrative action, be interpreted as meaning that it precludes national legislation, such as that arising from the application of Article 14 of legge 24 novembre 1981, n. 689 (Law No 689 of 24 November 1981) — as interpreted in the most recent case-law — which requires the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (National Competition Authority, Italy) to initiate the investigation procedure with a view to establishing an improper (unfair) commercial practice within a time limit of 90 days, starting from the moment the Authority has knowledge of the essential elements of the infringement, the latter of which may be met by the first report of the infringement?’


(1)  Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/206/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-514/23, Tiberis Holding: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Tiberis Holding Srl v Gestore dei servizi energetici (GSE) SpA and Others
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: market prices, maximum price, minimum price, price of energy, renewable energy, sale








C_202300505EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/505


6.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Tiberis Holding Srl v Gestore dei servizi energetici (GSE) SpA and Others
(Case C-514/23, Tiberis Holding)
(C/2023/505)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tiberis Holding Srl

Defendants: Gestore dei servizi energetici (GSE) SpA, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Ministero dell’ambiente e della sicurezza energetica

Question referred

Do the principles set out in Article 3 of Directive 2009/28/EC (1) and Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 (2) preclude or not preclude national legislation which, in the context of a national incentive scheme, provides, in situations where producers sell energy on the free market, for an incentive tariff that guarantees a minimum price, which is at the same time also a maximum price, by virtue of an adjustment/reimbursement mechanism for sums exceeding the value of the incentive where the market price is higher than the latter (the so-called negative incentive), and, moreover, applies the adjustment mechanism only where the producer selling energy on the free market accesses the incentive by registering in the relevant register and not also where it accesses it by participating in an auction procedure?


(1)  Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (OJ 2009 L 140, p. 16).

(2)  Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (recast) (OJ 2018 L 328, p. 82).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/505/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 7 August 2023 2023/C 279/06
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2023279EN.01000601.xml










8.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/6






Euro exchange rates (1)

7 August 2023
(2023/C 279/06)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0984 




JPY


Japanese yen


156,21 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4515 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86163 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,6625 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9625 




ISK


Iceland króna


145,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,1485 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,224 




HUF


Hungarian forint


389,50 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4138 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9490 




TRY


Turkish lira


29,6575 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6715 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4688 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5744 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8004 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4730 




KRW


South Korean won


1 436,38 




ZAR


South African rand


20,4371 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8976 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 688,03 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0076 




PHP


Philippine peso


61,654 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


38,246 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,3609 




MXN


Mexican peso


18,7490 




INR


Indian rupee


90,8738 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-506/23, Network One Distribution: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Network One Distribution SRLv Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili, Autoritatea Vamală Română — Direcția Regională Vamală București Ministerul Finanțelor — Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: anti-dumping duty, customs regulations, interest, periodic penalty payment, taxpayer








C_202300747EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/747


20.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Network One Distribution SRLv Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili, Autoritatea Vamală Română — Direcția Regională Vamală București Ministerul Finanțelor — Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor
(Case C-506/23, Network One Distribution)
(C/2023/747)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant/applicant at first instance: Network One Distribution SRL

Respondents/defendants at first instance: Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Agenția Națională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcția Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili, Autoritatea Vamală Română — Direcția Regională Vamală București, Ministerul Finanțelor — Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor

Questions referred

Must EU law and, in particular, Article 114 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (1) be interpreted as precluding an administrative practice which, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, in respect of the amount of anti-dumping duty, imposes on a taxpayer, in addition to the periodic penalty payments provided for in Article 114 of the regulation, a periodic penalty payment provided for separately in national legislation (Codul de procedură fiscal (Romanian Tax Procedure Code))?


(1)  
            OJ 2013 L 269, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/747/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-511/23, Caronte & Tourist: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Caronte & Tourist SpA v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, administrative measure, competition policy, control of restrictive practices, dominant position, limitation of legal proceedings








C_202300504EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/504


6.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 8 August 2023 — Caronte & Tourist SpA v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato
(Case C-511/23, Caronte & Tourist)
(C/2023/504)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Caronte & Tourist SpA

Defendant: Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato

Question referred

Must Article 102 TFEU, read in the light of the principles of protection of competition and effectiveness of administrative action, be interpreted as meaning that it precludes national legislation, such as that arising from the application of Article 14 of legge 24 novembre 1981, n. 689 (Law No 689 of 24 November 1981) — as interpreted in the most recent case-law — which requires the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (National Competition Authority, Italy) to initiate the investigation procedure with a view to establishing an abuse of a dominant position within a time limit of 90 days, starting from the moment the Authority has knowledge of the essential elements of the infringement, the latter of which may be met by the first report of the infringement?


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/504/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-481/23: Action brought on 8 August 2023 — Banco Credibom v SRB
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, bank, bank resolution, company in difficulties, equal treatment, financial risk, financing method, financing plan, principle of proportionality








C_2023338EN.01003601.xml










25.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/36






Action brought on 8 August 2023 — Banco Credibom v SRB
(Case T-481/23)
(2023/C 338/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Banco Credibom, SA (Porto Salvo, Portugal) (represented by: H. Berger, M. Weber and D. Schoo, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Decision of the SRB of 2 May 2023, document no. SRB/ES/2023/23, including Annexes I, II and III, as far as it concerns the ex-ante contribution of the applicant;










—


order the SRB to pay 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 that the SRB has infringed Article 70(2) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (1) by not applying the binding 12,5 % cap to the target level when determining the annual target level.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63 (2) is in breach of the delegated powers conferred on the Commission by Article 103(7) of the Directive 2014/59/EU (3), the principle of equal treatment and the principle of risk-based contributions, respectively the principle of proportionality, in that it does not allow the SRB to exclude the applicant’s additional liabilities arising from a securitisation transaction carried out in 2021.






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63 of 21 October 2014 supplementing Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ex ante contributions to resolution financing arrangements (OJ 2015 L 11, p. 44).

(3)  Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Council Directive 82/891/EEC, and Directives 2001/24/EC, 2002/47/EC, 2004/25/EC, 2005/56/EC, 2007/36/EC, 2011/35/EU, 2012/30/EU and 2013/36/EU, and Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 648/2012, of the European Parliament and of the Council Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 190).
Case T-473/23: Action brought on 8 August 2023 — Bartex Bartol v EUIPO — Grupa Chorten (duch puszczy)
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023329EN.01003901.xml










18.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/39






Action brought on 8 August 2023 — Bartex Bartol v EUIPO — Grupa Chorten (duch puszczy)
(Case T-473/23)
(2023/C 329/57)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Bartex Bartol sp. z o.o sp. k. (Nowy Tomyśl, Poland) (represented by: A. Gierczak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Grupa Chorten (Białystok, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark duch puszczy — European Union trade mark No 15 668 213

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 Mai 2023 in Case R 1450/2022-5

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 to bear the costs of the proceedings and reimburse the applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law







—


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 Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and of Article 54(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal;










—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council in conjunction with Article 52 of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal and with Article 16(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;










—


Infringement of Article 16(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 and of Article 52 of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11197 – SCL / ETHIAS / ETHIAS LEASE JV) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 279/08
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, Spain, economic concentration, financial services, insurance, merger control, provision of services, rental business, vehicle rental








C_2023279EN.01000901.xml










8.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/9






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11197 – SCL / ETHIAS / ETHIAS LEASE JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 279/08)

1.   
On 31 July 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:






—


Santander Consumer Leasing B.V. (‘SCL’) (The Netherlands), belonging to the Banco Santander Group,










—


Ethias NV/SA (‘Ethias’) (Belgium).




SCL and Ethias will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Ethias Lease (‘the JV’).
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.


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






—


SCL is a Dutch car leasing business of Santander Group, a Spanish-based financial services group,










—


Ethias is an insurer, offering a range of life and non-life insurance products, mostly active in Belgium.






3.   

The business activities of Ethias Lease will be the development and provision of operational leasing services for green electric vehicle (including insurance and assistance), and e-mobility solutions in the SME, corporate and public segments in Belgium, which shall operate as a multi-brand platform.



4.   
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.


5.   
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.11197 – SCL / ETHIAS / ETHIAS LEASE JV
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 C-507/23, Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības centrs: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 8 August 2023 — A v Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības centrs
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data protection, data-processing law, indemnification, personal data, protection of privacy








C_202300125EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/125


16.10.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 8 August 2023 — A v Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības centrs
(Case C-507/23, Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības centrs)
(C/2023/125)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa (Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant at first instance and appellant: A

Defendant at first instance and respondent: Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības centrs

Questions referred









1.


Must Article 82(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation (1) be interpreted as meaning that the unlawful processing of personal data, in so far as it is an infringement of that regulation, may, in itself, constitute unjustified interference with a person’s subjective right to the protection of his or her data and damage caused to that person?












2.


Must Article 82(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation be interpreted as meaning that, where there is no possibility of restoring the situation that existed before the damage was caused, it permits the imposition of the obligation to apologise as the sole form of compensation for non-material damage?












3.


Must Article 82(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation be interpreted as meaning that it permits a smaller amount of compensation for the damage caused to be set on the basis of circumstances that are indicative of the attitude and motivation of the person processing the data (for example, the need to perform a task carried out in the public interest, the lack of intent to cause damage to the person concerned or difficulties in understanding the legal framework)?






(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 (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/125/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11172 – PLD / NBIM / VEGHEL) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 287/01
Date: 2023-08-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Netherlands, economic concentration, investment company, logistics, merger control, real estate business, real property








C_2023287EN.01000101.xml










16.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11172 – PLD / NBIM / VEGHEL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 287/01)
On 8 August 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 32023M11172. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.