do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-6/24, Abanca Corporación Bancaria: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 8 de La Coruña (Spain) lodged on 4 January 2024 – Abanca Corporación Bancaria, S. A. v WE
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, national law, redemption, unfair terms of contract








C_202403889EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3889


1.7.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 8 de La Coruña (Spain) lodged on 4 January 2024 – Abanca Corporación Bancaria, S. A. v WE


(Case C-6/24, Abanca Corporación Bancaria)

(C/2024/3889)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 8 de La Coruña

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Abanca Corporación Bancaria, S. A.

Defendant: WE

Questions referred







1.


Is an acceleration clause which provides for the possibility of calling off or preventing acceleration within a certain period of time consistent with Articles 3(1) and (7) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, (1) or does such a right have to be recognised in a specific provision of national law?










2.


If the answer to the foregoing question is in the affirmative, what period of time would be reasonable?






(1)  
            OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3889/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-2/24: Action brought on 4 January 2024 — Mezzaroma v Parliament
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, Member of the European Parliament, equal treatment, pension scheme, retired person








C_202401552EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1552


26.2.2024





Action brought on 4 January 2024 — Mezzaroma v Parliament
(Case T-2/24)
(C/2024/1552)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Roberto Mezzaroma (Rome, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul in its entirety the decision with which the Bureau of the European Parliament denied the applicant’s right to receive an increase in his pension for health reasons; and










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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








1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the general principles of EU law, in particular the principle of equality and equal treatment and that of the protection of legitimate expectations;












2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of essential procedural requirements by failing to state reasons, and the consequent infringement of Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1552/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/212 of 4 January 2024 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Mali, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








L_202400212EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series L













2024/212


5.1.2024







            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2024/212
of 4 January 2024
         
implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 of 28 September 2017 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali (1), and in particular Article 12(5) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 5 September 2017, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2374 (2017), which established a framework for the imposition of a travel ban and an assets freeze against individuals and entities responsible for or complicit in, or having engaged in, directly or indirectly, threatening the peace, security, or stability of Mali.












(2)


On 28 September 2017, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 to give effect to Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1775, which concerns restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali (2).












(3)


On 31 August 2023, the United Nations sanctions regime expired when the Security Council failed to agree on its extension.












(4)


In view of the termination of the UN sanctions regime on Mali, all the entries in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 should be deleted.












(5)


Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2017/1770 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 4 January 2024.


For the Council


The President

H. LAHBIB
            





(1)  
            OJ L 251, 29.9.2017, p. 1.

(2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1775 of 28 September 2017 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Mali (OJ L 251, 29.9.2017, p. 23).




ANNEX
In Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2017/1770, in the ‘List of natural or legal persons, entities and bodies referred to in Article 2a’, the entries concerning the following persons are deleted:






1.


AHMED AG ALBACHAR;










2.


HOUKA HOUKA AG ALHOUSSEINI;










3.


MAHRI SIDI AMAR BEN DAHA;










4.


MOHAMED BEN AHMED MAHRI;










5.


MOHAMED OULD MATALY.







ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/212/oj
ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)
Case C-7/24, Deutsche Rentenversicherung Nord and BG Verkehr: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Retten i Svendborg (Denmark) lodged on 4 January 2024 — Deutsche Rentenversicherung Nord, BG Verkehr v Gjensidige Forsikring, dansk filial af Gjensidige Forsikring ASA, Norge for Marius Pedersen A/S and Gjensidige Forsikring, dansk filial af Gjensidige Forsikring ASA, Norge
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, damages, social security legislation, social-security benefit, social-security harmonisation, trauma








C_202401847EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1847


11.3.2024





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Retten i Svendborg (Denmark) lodged on 4 January 2024 — Deutsche Rentenversicherung Nord, BG Verkehr v Gjensidige Forsikring, dansk filial af Gjensidige Forsikring ASA, Norge for Marius Pedersen A/S and Gjensidige Forsikring, dansk filial af Gjensidige Forsikring ASA, Norge
(Case C-7/24, Deutsche Rentenversicherung Nord and BG Verkehr)
(C/2024/1847)
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Retten i Svendborg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Deutsche Rentenversicherung Nord and BG Verkehr

Defendant: Gjensidige Forsikring, dansk filial af Gjensidige Forsikring ASA, Norge for Marius Pedersen A/S and Gjensidige Forsikring, dansk filial af Gjensidige Forsikring ASA, Norge

Question referred

Must Article 85(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 (1) of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems be interpreted as meaning that for the obliged institution to have a right of recoupment under that provision there must be a lawful basis in the Member State in which the injury occurred for the type of damages or compensation for which a right of recoupment is claimed, or equivalent benefit, as a consequence of the event for which the party responsible for the injury is liable for damages under the law of the place where the injury occurred?


(1)  
            OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1847/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections – SA.106193Text with EEA relevance.
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: State aid, Sweden, Västerbotten county, air transport, control of State aid








C_202400598EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/598


4.1.2024






Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
SA.106193
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2023/598)








Date of adoption of the decision


24.11.2023




Aid number


SA.106193




Member State


Sweden




Region


VAESTERBOTTENS LAEN




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Skellefteå Airport — Entrustment of a Service of General Economic Interest




Legal basis


Skellefteå kommuns förordnande till Skellefteå Airport att utföra en tjänst av allmänt ekonomiskt intresse




Type of measure


Ad Hoc Case


Skellefteå City Airport




Objective


Services of general economic interest (SGEI), Airport operation




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


 




Intensity


 




Duration


1.1.2024 — 31.12.2030




Economic sectors


Air transport




Name and address of the granting authority







Skellefteå kommun




Trädgårdsgatan 6, Skellefteå








Other information


 




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search?caseInstrument=SA


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/598/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 4,50 % on 1 January 2024 – Euro exchange rates
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, financing, interest, money








C_202400571EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/571


4.1.2024






Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

            4,50 % on 1 January 2024
         
Euro exchange rates (2)


            3 January 2024
         
(C/2024/571)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0919 




JPY


Japanese yen


156,16 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4581 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86470 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,1915 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9322 




ISK


Iceland króna


150,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,3200 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,675 




HUF


Hungarian forint


380,75 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3638 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9725 




TRY


Turkish lira


32,5178 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6236 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4574 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5257 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7515 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4503 




KRW


South Korean won


1 432,28 




ZAR


South African rand


20,5326 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8057 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 994,33 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0566 




PHP


Philippine peso


60,699 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,616 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,3859 




MXN


Mexican peso


18,6682 




INR


Indian rupee


90,9650 






(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  
            Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/571/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-2/24 P: Appeal brought on 4 January 2024 by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and Cephalon Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 18 October 2023 in Case T-74/21, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Cephalon v Commission
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: alternative dispute resolution, cartel, control of restrictive practices, disease of the nervous system, market-sharing agreement, medicinal product, patent, restriction on competition, sanction (EU), trade dispute








C_202401547EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1547


26.2.2024





Appeal brought on 4 January 2024 by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and Cephalon Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 18 October 2023 in Case T-74/21, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Cephalon v Commission
(Case C-2/24 P)
(C/2024/1547)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, Cephalon Inc. (represented by: S. Ortoli, D. Tayar, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The Appellants claim that the Court should:






—


accept the present appeal and declare the action admissible;










—


set aside the judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2023 in the case T-74/21;










—


refer the case back to the General Court for a new judgment to be taken, unless the Court considers that it is sufficiently well informed to annul the decision of the European Commission in the case AT.39686-CEPHALON (1);










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings, including the costs incurred by the Appellants before this Court and before the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellants put forward two pleas in law to support their request:






1.


The judgment is vitiated by a manifest error of law as it distorted the test laid out in Generics UK for the analysis of the alleged by-object restriction of the settlement agreement.










2.


The judgment is vitiated by a manifest error of law in its finding that the settlement agreement was restrictive of competition by effect.






(1)  Decision of 26 November 2020.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1547/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-4/24: Action brought on 4 January 2024 — LA v Commission
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), equal treatment, scientific profession, scientific research, staff regulations (EU)








C_202401705EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1705


4.3.2024





Action brought on 4 January 2024 — LA v Commission
(Case T-4/24)
(C/2024/1705)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: LA (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the decision of 22 March 2023 not to include the applicant on the reserve list for competition EPSO/AD/371/19, as he obtained an insufficient score on the MCQ test (eliminatory multiple choice test);










—


annul the decision of 28 March 2023 rejecting the request to reconsider the exclusion from competition EPSO/AD/371/19;










—


annul the decision of the appointing authority of 22 October 2023 by which there was an implied rejection of the administrative appeal brought under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’) in force on 22 June 2023, following the institution's silence for four months from the date of lodging the internal appeal;










—


order the Commission to pay the 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: (i) an infringement of Article 27 of the Staff Regulations and of the equal treatment of candidates; (ii) an infringement of the notice of competition; (iii) a breach of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations; and (iv) that the notice of competition is unlawful.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging: (i) a breach of the obligation to state reasons and failure to observe the connected principle of equality of the parties in the proceedings (Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights); and (ii) a breach of the principle of good administration.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging an infringement of Article 5, paragraphs 5 and 6, of Annex III of the Staff Regulations.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1705/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections – SA.106898Text with EEA relevance.
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: France, State aid, carriage for hire or reward, control of State aid, newspaper, postal service, publishing, serial publication, services of general interest








C_202400585EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/585


4.1.2024






Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
SA.106898
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/585)







Date of adoption of the decision


13.12.2023




Aid number


SA.106898




Member State


France




Region


 




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Régime d’aide temporaire aux réseaux de portage de la presse




Legal basis


Décret instituant une aide temporaire aux réseaux de portage de la presse




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Culture, Sectorial development




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 4 800 000  EUR




Intensity


80,0  %




Duration


Until 31.12.2024




Economic sectors


Other postal and courier activities, Publishing of newspapers, Publishing of journals and periodicals




Name and address of the granting authority







Ministère de la culture — Direction générale des medias et des industries culturelles




182 rue Saint-Honoré, 75001 PARIS








Other information


 




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search?caseInstrument=SA


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/585/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-3/24, MISTRAL TRANS: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 4 January 2024 – SIA MISTRAL TRANS v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
Date: 2024-01-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: accountant, administrative sanction, group of companies, money laundering, principle of proportionality, provision of services, terrorism financing








C_202402410EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2410


8.4.2024





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 4 January 2024 — SIA MISTRAL TRANS v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
(Case C-3/24, MISTRAL TRANS)
(C/2024/2410)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa (Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant at first instance and appellant: SIA MISTRAL TRANS

Defendant at first instance and respondent: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests

Questions referred







1.


Must the term ‘external accountant’ in point (a) of Article 2(1)(3) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that it is also applicable to cases in which the accounting services are provided solely to persons related to the external accountant?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, must Article 58(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC, be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of the proportionality of the sanction imposed, the following facts are relevant: (1) the accounting service is provided solely to persons related to the person providing the service; (2) the choice to carry out the accounting by taking on an external accountant depends on efficiency considerations, within a group of related undertakings, and is not determined by criteria derived from legislation or criteria based on economic reality?






(1)  
            OJ 2015 L 141, p. 73.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2410/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)