do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice concerning the date of entry into force of the amendment to Annex 14-B of the Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Japan, cooperation agreement (EU), designation of origin, economic cooperation, labelling, product designation, revision of an agreement








L_202302119EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series L













2023/2119


12.10.2023






Notice concerning the date of entry into force of the amendment to Annex 14-B of the Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership

By means of its Decision No 1/2023, the Joint Committee established under the Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership, signed in Tokyo on 17 July 2018
          (1), decided to amend Annex 14-B of the Agreement. The amendment entered into force on 30 September 2023.


(1)  
            OJ L 330, 27.12.2018, p. 3.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/notice/2023/2119/oj
ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)
Case T-507/22: Order of the General Court of 12 October 2023 — Schrom Farms v Commission (Action for annulment — EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Lack of direct concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Czechia, EAFRD, EAGF, admissibility, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, audit, eligibility criteria, equal treatment, national law








C_202400412EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/412


3.1.2024





Order of the General Court of 12 October 2023 — Schrom Farms v Commission
(Case T-507/22) (1)

(Action for annulment - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Lack of direct concern - Inadmissibility)
(C/2024/412)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Schrom Farms spol. s r. o. (Velké Albrechtice, Czech Republic) (represented by: S. Sobolová and O. Billard, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina and M. Salyková, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/908 of 8 June 2022 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2022 L 157, p. 15) in so far as it covers financing of EUR 30 606,96 comprising a grant from Czech authorities to the applicant awarded in the context of the Czech rural development programme for the modernisation of farms.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Schrom Farms spol. s r. o. shall pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 408, 24.10.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/412/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-545/22: Order of the General Court of 12 October 2023 — Hästens Sängar v EUIPO — Mustang (Checked pattern in beige with white horses)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, furniture industry, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_202400454EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/454


3.1.2024





Order of the General Court of 12 October 2023 — Hästens Sängar v EUIPO — Mustang (Checked pattern in beige with white horses)
(Case T-545/22) (1)

(C/2024/454)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  
            OJ C 418, 31.10.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/454/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-625/23, Società agricola Circe: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 12 October 2023 — Società agricola Circe di OL società semplice v ST, in his own name and as owner of the sole proprietorship Agricola Case Rosse di ST, Agenzia per le Erogazioni in Agricoltura (AGEA)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural holding, aid per hectare, aid to agriculture, demerger, eligibility criteria, single payment scheme, transfer of property








C_202400627EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/627


15.1.2024





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 12 October 2023 — Società agricola Circe di OL società semplice v ST, in his own name and as owner of the sole proprietorship Agricola Case Rosse di ST, Agenzia per le Erogazioni in Agricoltura (AGEA)
(Case C-625/23, Società agricola Circe)
(C/2024/627)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Società agricola Circe di OL società semplice

Defendants: ST, in his own name and as owner of the sole proprietorship Agricola Case Rosse di ST, Agenzia per le Erogazioni in Agricoltura (AGEA)

Questions referred







1.


Must the term ‘scission’ contained in Article 33(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 be understood as referring to the legal construct in company law, thus entailing a change in the company resulting in the original property and areas under cultivation of one company being split into two separate properties belonging to different legal entities, or can it be interpreted broadly and thus apply to any contractual legal event that results in the original property and areas under cultivation of the original ‘agricultural’ company being allocated to two different entities, including through the transfer of quotas and the sale of land?










2.


According to the correct interpretation to be given to the provisions of Regulation No 1782/2003 (Articles 2, 23, 24, 33, 34, 36, 38, 43 and 44) for the final allocation of CAP certificates, when the single payment is first applied, is it relevant that the area under cultivation and the eligible hectares were reduced in 2002, after the submission of the application by the ‘farmer’ and the provisional allocation of the certificates, if that reduction occurred as a result of the sale of a portion of the land in question in 2002, and the reduction can be applied automatically during the final allocation?






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/627/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-21/22, OP (Choice of the law of a third state for succession): Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Opolu — Poland) — OP v Notariusz Justyna Gawlica (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — National law applicable in matters of succession — Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 — Article 22 — Choice-of-law clause — Scope ratione personae — Third-country national — Article 75 — Relationship with existing international conventions — Bilateral agreement between the Republic of Poland and Ukraine)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, Ukraine, application of the law, bilateral agreement, foreign national, inheritance, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, law of succession, residence








C_202300932EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/932


27.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Opolu — Poland) — OP v Notariusz Justyna Gawlica
(Case C-21/22, (1) OP (Choice of the law of a third state for succession))
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - National law applicable in matters of succession - Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 - Article 22 - Choice-of-law clause - Scope ratione personae - Third-country national - Article 75 - Relationship with existing international conventions - Bilateral agreement between the Republic of Poland and Ukraine)
(C/2023/932)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Opolu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: OP

Defendant: Notariusz Justyna Gawlica

Other party to the proceedings: Marcin Margoński

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 22 of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession
must be interpreted as meaning that a third-country national residing in a Member State of the European Union may choose the law of that third State as the law governing his or her succession as a whole.










2.


Article 75 of Regulation No 650/2012, read in conjunction with Article 22 of that regulation,
must be interpreted as not precluding — where a Member State of the European Union has concluded, before the adoption of that regulation, a bilateral agreement with a third State which designates the law applicable to succession and does not expressly provide for the possibility of choosing another law — a national of that third State, residing in the Member State in question, from not being able to choose the law of that third State to govern his or her succession as a whole.






(1)  
            OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/932/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-57/22, Ředitelství silnic a dálnic: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud — Czech Republic) — YQ v Ředitelství silnic a dálnic ČR (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Protection of the safety and health of workers — Organisation of working time — Directive 2003/88/EC — Article 7(1) — Right to paid annual leave — Worker unlawfully dismissed and then reinstated in his or her employment by decision of a court — Exclusion from the right to paid annual leave not taken for the period between the dismissal and the reinstatement — Period between the date of dismissal and the date of the reinstatement)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, arrangement of working time, indemnification, national law, paid leave, unfair dismissal, wage earner








C_202300934EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/934


27.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud — Czech Republic) — YQ v Ředitelství silnic a dálnic ČR
(Case C-57/22, (1) Ředitelství silnic a dálnic)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Organisation of working time - Directive 2003/88/EC - Article 7(1) - Right to paid annual leave - Worker unlawfully dismissed and then reinstated in his or her employment by decision of a court - Exclusion from the right to paid annual leave not taken for the period between the dismissal and the reinstatement - Period between the date of dismissal and the date of the reinstatement)
(C/2023/934)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: YQ

Defendant: Ředitelství silnic a dálnic ČR

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time must be interpreted as precluding national case-law by virtue of which a worker who was unlawfully dismissed and then reinstated in his or her employment, in accordance with national law, following the annulment of his or her dismissal by a decision of a court, is not entitled to paid annual leave for the period between the date of the dismissal and the date of his or her reinstatement in his or her employment on the ground that, during that period, that worker did not actually carry out work for the employer as the latter did not assign him or her work and as he or she is already entitled, under national law, to wage compensation during that period.


(1)  
            OJ C 207, 23.5.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/934/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-1027/23: Action brought on 12 October 2023 — Fast Retailing v EUIPO — Gonarrue (GU)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_202301171EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/1171


4.12.2023





Action brought on 12 October 2023 — Fast Retailing v EUIPO — Gonarrue (GU)
(Case T-1027/23)
(C/2023/1171)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Fast Retailing Co. Ltd (Yamaguchi, Japan) (represented by: J.M. Mora Cortés, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gonarrue, SL (San Sebastián, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark GU — Application No 18 226 269

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 July 2023 in Case R 0636/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul or revoke the contested decision in so far as it dismissed Case R 0636/2022-2, and therefore declare Case R 0636/2022-2 admissible, maintaining Case R 0636/2022-2 in the same state it was in on 28 March 2023, that is to say suspended pending the decision of the action for invalidity brought against EU mark No 18 199 789;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those incurred during the proceedings before the Operations Department and before the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 102(1) and/or Article 103(1) and (2), in conjunction with Article 70(1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.










—


Infringement of Article 107 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.










—


Infringement of the general EU-law principle of legal certainty.










—


Infringement of the general EU-law principle of equal treatment.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1171/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11275 – MACQUARIE / ENEL / ENEL GREEN POWER HELLAS)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy production, geothermal energy, hydroelectric power, hydrogen, investment company, merger control, renewable resources, solar energy, wind energy








C_202300856EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/856


9.11.2023






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11275 – MACQUARIE / ENEL / ENEL GREEN POWER HELLAS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2023/856)

On 12 October 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 32023M11275. 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/2023/856/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-726/21, INTER CONSULTING: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Županijski sud u Puli-Pola — Croatia) — criminal proceedings against GR, HS, IT (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Article 54 — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 50 — Principle ne bis in idem — Assessment in the light of the facts contained in the grounds of the judgment — Assessment in the light of the facts examined in the context of a preliminary investigation and omitted from the indictment — Meaning of ‘the same acts’)
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: charge, criminal proceedings, general legal principle, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, ruling








C_202300930EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/930


27.11.2023





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 October 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Županijski sud u Puli-Pola — Croatia) — criminal proceedings against GR, HS, IT
(Case C-726/21, (1) INTER CONSULTING)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement - Article 54 - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 50 - Principle ne bis in idem - Assessment in the light of the facts contained in the grounds of the judgment - Assessment in the light of the facts examined in the context of a preliminary investigation and omitted from the indictment - Meaning of ‘the same acts’)
(C/2023/930)
Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Županijski sud u Puli-Pola

Parties in the main proceedings

GR, HS, IT

Intervening parties: Županijsko državno odvjetništvo u Puli-Pola

Operative part of the judgment

Article 54 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders, signed in Schengen on 19 June 1990, which entered into force on 26 March 1995, read in the light of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
must be interpreted as meaning that, when assessing whether the principle ne bis in idem has been complied with, it is necessary to take into consideration not only the facts cited in the enacting terms of the indictment drawn up by the competent authorities of another Member State and in the operative part of the final judgment delivered in that Member State, but also the facts cited in the grounds of that judgment, including those that were the subject of the preliminary investigation, but which were not included in the indictment, and all relevant information concerning the material facts covered by previous criminal proceedings conducted in that other Member State and concluded by a final decision.


(1)  
            OJ C 64, 7.2.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/930/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-1026/23: Action brought on 12 October 2023 — Laudamotion v Commission
Date: 2023-10-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Austria, Germany, Vienna, airline, carriage of passengers, civil aviation, control of restrictive practices, restriction on competition, rights of the defence








C_202300990EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/990


27.11.2023





Action brought on 12 October 2023 — Laudamotion v Commission
(Case T-1026/23)
(C/2023/990)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Laudamotion GmbH (Schwechat, Austria) (represented by: N. Levy, G. Rizza and D. Pérez de Lamo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul Commission Decision C(2023)5177 of 2 August 2023 in Case AT.40612 — Lufthansa — Air Berlin (routes from/to Vienna);










—


Order the Commission to bear the applicants’ and its own costs and expenses in connection with these proceedings; and










—


Order any interveners to bear their own costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed the applicant’s right to good administration under Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and procedural rights by failing to conduct a diligent investigation. In that context it is also alleged that the Commission failed to take meaningful investigative measures and failed to grant access to documents and effectively deprived the applicant of its right to be heard.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission manifestly erred in rejecting the applicant’s complaint relying on the existence of another plausible explanation for the parallel behaviour. In that regard, it is alleged that the written submissions made by the applicant in the course of the investigation should have led the Commission to make a different assessment of the complaint, instead of finding a low likelihood of infringement based on a wrong legal standard. It is also alleged that the Commission manifestly erred in determining the existence of another plausible explanation for the parallel behaviour.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission manifestly erred in rejecting the complaint for lack of anticompetitive effects.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/990/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)