do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice for the attention of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2023/1767, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1765 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine 2023/C 324/05
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Ukraine, economic sanctions, freezing of assets, international sanctions, legal person, natural person, territorial dispute, territorial law








C_2023324EN.01001201.xml










14.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/12







Notice for the attention of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Decision (CFSP) 2023/1767, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1765 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine
(2023/C 324/05)

The following information is brought to the attention of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1767 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (3) as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1765 (4) concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.
Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 requires that those natural or legal persons, entities or bodies must report, before 1 September 2022 or within 6 weeks from the date of listing in Annex I, whichever is latest, funds or economic resources within the jurisdiction of a Member State belonging to, owned, held or controlled by them, to the competent authority of the Member State where those funds or economic resources are located. They must cooperate with the national competent authority in any verification of such information. Failure to comply with these obligations will be considered as circumvention of the measures on the freezing of funds and of economic resources.
The information to be reported must be sent to the competent authority of the relevant Member State, via its website as indicated in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 269/2014.


(1)  
            OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 16.

(2)  
            OJ L 226, 14.9.2023, p. 104.

(3)  
            OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 6.

(4)  
            OJ L 226, 14.9.2023, p. 3.
Case C-246/22, Staatsanwaltschaft Köln and Bundesamt für Güterverkehr (Transport of empty containers): Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 September 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln — Germany) — BW (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Transport operations — Combined transport of goods between Member States — Directive 92/106/EEC — International carriage of goods by road — Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 — Transport of empty containers before loading or after unloading of goods in the context of combined transport — Non-applicability of the provisions relating to cabotage operations)
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air cabotage, combined transport, container, international transport, maritime cabotage, road cabotage








C_202300491EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/491


6.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 September 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln — Germany) — BW
(Case C-246/22, (1) Staatsanwaltschaft Köln and Bundesamt für Güterverkehr (Transport of empty containers))
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Transport operations - Combined transport of goods between Member States - Directive 92/106/EEC - International carriage of goods by road - Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 - Transport of empty containers before loading or after unloading of goods in the context of combined transport - Non-applicability of the provisions relating to cabotage operations)
(C/2023/491)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: BW

Other parties: Staatsanwaltschaft Köln, Bundesamt für Güterverkehr

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1 of Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States,
must be interpreted as meaning that the road transport of empty containers between a container terminal and a point where the goods are loaded or unloaded falls within the concept of ‘combined transport’ within the meaning of that article, such that it benefits from the liberalised scheme laid down for initial and/or final road transport legs which form an integral part of a combined transport operation, within the meaning of Article 4 of that directive, and which are exempt from the application of the provisions relating to cabotage laid down by Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international road haulage market.


(1)  
            OJ C 276, 18.7.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/491/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
No state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement 2023/C 324/09
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, control of State aid, digitisation, municipality, service








C_2023324EN.01001601.xml










14.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/16







No state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
(2023/C 324/09)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the following measure does not constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement:






Date of adoption of the decision


3 May 2023




Case No


90153




Decision No


067/23/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Organisation of municipal digitalisation services/solutions




Form of aid


No aid




The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/
Case C-55/22, Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 September 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Vorarlberg — Austria) — NK v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principle ne bis in idem — Final termination of a first set of proceedings brought for an infringement of a provision of national legislation on games of chance — Administrative penalty of a criminal nature imposed for the same acts for an infringement of a different provision of that legislation — First set of proceedings terminated on account of an incorrect legal classification of the offence committed)
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative procedure, administrative sanction, criminal proceedings, freedom to provide services, game of chance, rights of the defence








C_202300487EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/487


6.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 September 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Vorarlberg — Austria) — NK v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch
(Case C-55/22, (1) Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Principle ne bis in idem - Final termination of a first set of proceedings brought for an infringement of a provision of national legislation on games of chance - Administrative penalty of a criminal nature imposed for the same acts for an infringement of a different provision of that legislation - First set of proceedings terminated on account of an incorrect legal classification of the offence committed)
(C/2023/487)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Vorarlberg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: NK

Defendant: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch

Operative part of the judgment

Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in so far as it lays down the principle ne bis in idem, must be interpreted as precluding the imposition of a penalty of a criminal nature on a person for an infringement of a provision of national legislation which is liable to obstruct the exercise of the freedom to provide services, within the meaning of Article 56 TFEU, if that person has already been the subject of a judicial decision which has become final, given at the end of a hearing with the taking of evidence, and which resulted in that person being acquitted of an infringement of a different provision of that legislation in respect of the same acts.


(1)  
            OJ C 257, 4.7.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/487/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-569/23, Toplofikatsia Sofia: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 14 September 2023 — ‘Toplofikatsia Sofia’ EAD v M. K. T., Ts. B. T., А. K. V.
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disciplinary proceedings, free service, lawyer, legal action, legal aid, minimum pay, professional society, remuneration of work








C_202300961EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/961


27.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 14 September 2023 — ‘Toplofikatsia Sofia’ EAD v M. K. T., Ts. B. T., А. K. V.
(Case C-569/23, Toplofikatsia Sofia)
(C/2023/961)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant:
            ‘Toplofikatsia Sofia’ EAD

Defendants: M. K. T., Ts. B. T., А. K. V.

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 101(1) TFEU preclude national legislation, such as that applicable in the present case, under which a lawyer is obliged, on pain of disciplinary measures, to agree a fee that is not lower than the minimum amount provided for in the regulation, as regards each of the actions brought, irrespective of the form in which they are joined, and, if the client is not willing to pay such a fee in the light of the amount of the minimum fee in relation to the amount claimed or on grounds of financial difficulty, the only lawful possibility for the lawyer to conclude a contract with the client is to provide free legal assistance, in which case the court must determine and award to the lawyer a fee in respect of each action brought that may not be lower than the minimum amount laid down by the Vissh advokatski savet (Supreme Bar Council, Bulgaria), without it being possible to reduce that amount if the fee due is manifestly excessive?










2.


Does Article 101(1) TFEU preclude national legislation, such as that applicable in the present case, under which, in the case of minimum lawyers’ fees laid down in a regulation by way of a decision of an association of undertakings, the Supreme Bar Council, which is mandatory for and binding on all lawyers, a lawyer may provide free legal assistance to a client whom he or she considers to be a person in financial difficulty, and the court is obliged, without being able to verify this, to award the lawyer a fee equal to the minimum amount laid down in the decision of the association of undertakings?






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/961/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-466/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 September 2023 — Land Rheinland-Pfalz v Deutsche Lufthansa AG, European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany (Appeal — State aid — Aviation sector — Operational aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Frankfurt-Hahn airport — Article 108 TFEU — Decision not to open the formal investigation procedure — Action for annulment — Status as an interested party — Safeguard of procedural rights)
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, Rhineland-Palatinate, State aid, airline, airport, control of State aid








C_202300481EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/481


6.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 September 2023 — Land Rheinland-Pfalz v Deutsche Lufthansa AG, European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-466/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Aviation sector - Operational aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Frankfurt-Hahn airport - Article 108 TFEU - Decision not to open the formal investigation procedure - Action for annulment - Status as an interested party - Safeguard of procedural rights)
(C/2023/481)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Land Rheinland-Pfalz (represented by: R. van der Hout and C. Wagner, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Deutsche Lufthansa AG (represented by A. Martin-Ehlers, Rechtsanwalt), European Commission (represented by C. Georgieva and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents), Federal Republic of Germany

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 19 May 2021, Deutsche Lufthansa v Commission (T 218/18, EU:T:2021:282);










2.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










3.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 368, 13.9.2021.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/481/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-393/22, EXTÉRIA: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 September 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud — Czech Republic) — EXTÉRIA s.r.o. v Spravime, s.r.o. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction in matters relating to a contract — Article 7(1)(b) — Concept of contract for the ‘provision of services’ — Termination of a contract to enter into a future contract relating to the future conclusion of a franchise agreement)
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: franchising, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, provision of services, termination of a contract








C_202300492EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/492


6.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 September 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud — Czech Republic) — EXTÉRIA s.r.o. v Spravime, s.r.o.
(Case C-393/22, (1) EXTÉRIA)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Special jurisdiction in matters relating to a contract - Article 7(1)(b) - Concept of contract for the ‘provision of services’ - Termination of a contract to enter into a future contract relating to the future conclusion of a franchise agreement)
(C/2023/492)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: EXTÉRIA s.r.o.

Defendant: Spravime, s.r.o.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters,
must be interpreted as meaning that a contract to enter into a future contract relating to the future conclusion of a franchise agreement which provides for an obligation to pay a contractual penalty based on non-performance of that contract to enter into a future contract, the breach of which serves as a basis for a claim, does not fall within the concept of a contract for the ‘provision of services’ within the meaning of that provision. In such a case, jurisdiction over a claim on which that obligation serves as a basis is determined, in accordance with Article 7(1)(a) of that regulation, by reference to the place of performance of that obligation.


(1)  
            OJ C 359, 19.9.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/492/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-124/22 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 September 2023 — Zoi Apostolopoulou, Anastasia Apostolopoulou-Chrysanthaki v European Union, represented by the European Commission (Appeal — Non-contractual liability of the European Union — Grant agreements concluded in the context of various European programmes — Judgments of the General Court finding a breach of contractual terms by the beneficiary company — Partnership governed by Greek law — Company placed under liquidation — Proceedings before the national courts brought against the partners in the beneficiary company, seeking enforcement of the judgments of the General Court ordering recovery of the grants — Allegedly false assertions made by the European Commission in the national proceedings — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals — Rule of EU law)
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: damages, debt, defamation, eligibility criteria, enforcement of ruling, financial aid, fraud against the EU, liquidation, reimbursement of aid, right to justice








C_202300490EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/490


6.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 September 2023 — Zoi Apostolopoulou, Anastasia Apostolopoulou-Chrysanthaki v European Union, represented by the European Commission
(Case C-124/22 P) (1)

(Appeal - Non-contractual liability of the European Union - Grant agreements concluded in the context of various European programmes - Judgments of the General Court finding a breach of contractual terms by the beneficiary company - Partnership governed by Greek law - Company placed under liquidation - Proceedings before the national courts brought against the partners in the beneficiary company, seeking enforcement of the judgments of the General Court ordering recovery of the grants - Allegedly false assertions made by the European Commission in the national proceedings - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals - Rule of EU law)
(C/2023/490)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellants: Zoi Apostolopoulou, Anastasia Apostolopoulou-Chrysanthaki (represented by: D. Gkouskos, dikigoros)

Other party: European Union, represented by the European Commission (represented by: T. Adamopoulos and S. Romoli)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Ms Zoi Apostolopoulou and Ms Anastasia Apostolopoulou-Chrysanthaki to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 244, 27.6.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/490/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-568/23: Action brought on 14 September 2023 — August Storck v EUIPO (MiT FREUDE NASCHEN!)
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, confectionery, confectionery product, pastry-making, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202300231EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/231


23.10.2023





Action brought on 14 September 2023 — August Storck v EUIPO (MiT FREUDE NASCHEN!)
(Case T-568/23)
(C/2023/231)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: August Storck KG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: P. Goldenbaum, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for the EU figurative mark MiT FREUDE NASCHEN! — Application No 18 730 759

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 July 2023 in Case R 539/2023-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/231/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11240 – ORLEN / DOPPLER ENERGIE) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 324/12
Date: 2023-09-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Austria, biofuel, consumer goods, economic concentration, electric vehicle, electrical energy, energy production, hydrocarbon, merger control, oil industry, petrol








C_2023324EN.01002001.xml










14.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 324/20







Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11240 – ORLEN / DOPPLER ENERGIE)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 324/12)


1.   
On 30 August 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:






—


ORLEN S.A. (‘ORLEN’, Poland),










—


Doppler Energie GmbH (‘Doppler’, Austria), ultimately solely controlled by Mr Franz Joseph Doppler, an Austrian natural person,




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


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






—


ORLEN is primarily active in oil refining and in the production of biofuels, exploration and sales of gas, production of petrochemicals, production of electricity, wholesale and retail sales of motor fuels, retail sales of consumer goods, as well as hydrocarbon extraction,










—


Doppler operates a network of motor fuel filling stations and electric vehicle charging stations across Austria.






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.11240 – ORLEN / DOPPLER ENERGIE
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.