do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Action brought on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-6/24)
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Iceland, branch, company law, cross-border cooperation, exchange of information, national implementing measure, registration of a company, systems interconnection, technical specification








C_202403219EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3219


16.5.2024






Action brought on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-6/24)
(C/2024/3219)

An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Hildur Hjörvar, Catherine Howdle, and Melpo-Menie Joséphidès, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, Avenue de Arts 19H, 1000 Brussels, Belgium.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


Declare that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement by failing to make the Act referred to at point 1a of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1042 of 18 June 2021 laying down rules for the application of Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards technical specifications and procedures for the system of interconnection of registers and repealing Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2244), as adapted by Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement, part of its internal legal order, and










2.


Order Iceland to bear the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


By this application, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘ESA’) seeks a declaration from the Court that Iceland has failed to adopt the measures necessary to make the Act referred to at point 1a of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement, as adapted by Protocol 1 to that Agreement, part of its internal legal order, as required by Article 7 EEA.










—


In a reply dated 15 March 2024 to ESA΄s reasoned opinion of 22 November 2023, Iceland stated that the implementation of the Act was imminent.










—


When the deadline for Iceland to comply with the reasoned opinion expired on 22 January 2024, Iceland had not informed ESA of any measures it had adopted to make the Act part of its internal legal order.










—


At the point of lodging of the present application, ESA notes that Iceland has neither made the Act part of its internal legal order, nor has it informed ESA of having done so.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3219/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.108998Text with EEA relevance.
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Calabria, Italy, State aid, control of State aid, water supply, water treatment








C_202402380EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/2380


27.3.2024






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.108998
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/2380)








Date of adoption of the decision


21.9.2023




Aid number


SA.108998




Member State


Italy




Region


CALABRIA




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Sorical S.p.A.




Legal basis


Decreto del Dirigente Generale (D.D.G.) 10238 del 18.7.2023




Type of measure


Ad Hoc Case


Sorical S.p.A.




Objective


Rescuing undertakings in difficulty




Form of aid


Soft loan




Budget


Overall budget: 109 942 838  EUR
Annual budget: 109 942 838  EUR




Intensity


100,0  %




Duration


From 1.7.2023




Economic sectors


Water collection, treatment and supply




Name and address of the granting authority







Regione Calabria




Regione Calabria








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/2024/2380/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: France, Olympic games, commemoration, euro, issuing of currency




C_202402468EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/2468


27.3.2024






New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
(C/2024/2468)







National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by France

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009
             (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: France

Subject of commemoration: Jeux Olympiques 2024 - Lutte

Description of the design: For the countdown to the Paris 2024 Olympic Games, Monnaie de Paris celebrates the road to the games through Paris as well as its own heritage.
100 years after the 1924 Games, the French capital is once again hosting the Summer Games. This is an event with international resonance, gradually building in intensity in the years leading up to the event, culminating in 2024 with the issue of two commemorative two-euro coins dedicated to the Olympic Games.
The design represents Hercules, a national figure and icon of French numismatics, practicing antique wrestling with Notre-Dame’s Chimera, in reference to the Olympic Games of the Ancient era. Both wrestlers are depicted in the foreground in front of Notre-Dame Cathedral. In the background, an athletics track in which the emblem of Paris 2024 is inserted on the left side, is represented. The yeardate, the RF indication, as well as the mintmarks are inserted on the athletics track.
The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued: 510 000
         

Date of issue: January 2024


(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2468/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-172/24: Action brought on 27 March 2024 – Asaş Alüminyum v EUIPO – Asfaltos del Sureste (ASAŞ)
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, metals, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202403179EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3179


21.5.2024






Action brought on 27 March 2024 – Asaş Alüminyum v EUIPO – Asfaltos del Sureste (ASAŞ)


(Case T-172/24)

(C/2024/3179)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Asaş Alüminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Istanbul, Türkiye) (represented by: C. Sánchez Margareto and M. Pastor Palomares, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Asfaltos del Sureste, SA (San Pedro Del Pinatar, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark ASAŞ – Application for international registration designating the European Union No 1 596 257
         

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 January 2024 in Case R 1408/2023-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3179/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11283 – LONE STAR FUNDS / ERIKS)
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, distributor, economic concentration, industrial product, investment company, logistics, merger control, provision of services








C_202402506EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2506


5.4.2024






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11283 – LONE STAR FUNDS / ERIKS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/2506)

On 27 March 2024, 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 32024M11283. 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/2024/2506/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-240/24, BNP Paribas Fortis: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Notary in Krapkowice Justyna Gawlica – Krapkowice (Poland) lodged on 27 March 2024 – N.T. and Others
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: bank, inheritance, judicial proceedings, law of succession, legal expenses, official document








C_202404442EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/4442


22.7.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Notary in Krapkowice Justyna Gawlica – Krapkowice (Poland) lodged on 27 March 2024 – N.T. and Others


(Case C-240/24, BNP Paribas Fortis)

(C/2024/4442)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Notariusz w Krapkowicach Justyna Gawlica – Krapkowice

Parties to the main proceedings

N.T., O.T., S.T., BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NY

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 71(2) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council be interpreted as meaning that in the current proceedings to withdraw or modify a European Certificate of Succession that has been issued, the non-judicial authority issuing the certificate of succession is entitled to refer a question for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 267 of the TFEU?
and if the answer to that question is in the affirmative:










2.


Does Article 71(2) of the above regulation allow for the costs of proceedings to withdraw or modify a European Certificate of Succession to be charged, based on national law, to a bank that was not a participant in the proceedings to issue this certificate, has not filed an application for its withdrawal or modification, but has questioned the legitimation effects of the certificate presented to it in such a way that has led to the issuing authority of its own motion starting proceedings to withdraw or modify the certificate, conducted with the participation of that bank?
and if the answer to that question is in the affirmative:










3.


Must Article 69(2) of the above regulation be interpreted as meaning that the bank to which a valid certified copy of a European Certificate of Succession is presented is not entitled to challenge the status as heir of the person identified in the certificate?






(1)  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, OJ 2012 L 201, p. 107.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4442/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Action brought on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-5/24)
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Iceland, business management, data protection, disclosure of information, exchange of information, national implementing measure, protection of shareholders, shareholder, shareholding








C_202403218EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3218


16.5.2024






Action brought on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-5/24)
(C/2024/3218)

An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Hildur Hjörvar, Catherine Howdle, and Melpo-Menie Joséphidès, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, Avenue de Arts 19H, 1000 Brussels, Belgium.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


Declare that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement by failing to make the Act referred to at point 10ga of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1212 of 3 September 2018 laying down minimum requirements implementing the provisions of Directive 2007/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards shareholder identification, the transmission of information and the facilitation of the exercise of shareholders rights), as adapted by Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement, part of its internal legal order, and










2.


Order Iceland to bear the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


By this present application, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘ESA’) seeks a declaration from the Court that Iceland has failed to to adopt the measures necessary to make the Act referred to at point 10ga of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement, as adapted by Protocol 1 to that Agreement, part of its internal legal order, as required by Article 7 EEA.










—


In a reply dated 15 October 2023 to ESA΄ reasoned opinion of 19 April 2023, Iceland stated that the implementation of the Act was delayed.










—


When the deadline for Iceland to comply with the reasoned opinion expired on 19 June 2023, Iceland had not informed ESA of any measures adopted to make the Act part of its internal legal order.










—


At the point of lodging of the present application, ESA notes that Iceland has neither made the Act part of its internal legal order, nor has it informed ESA of having done so.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3218/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Action brought on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-4/24)
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Iceland, access to information, administrative transparency, board of management, business management, company with share capital, national implementing measure, protection of shareholders, shareholder, shareholding








C_202403217EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3217


16.5.2024






Action brought on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-4/24)
(C/2024/3217)

An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 27 March 2024 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Hildur Hjörvar, Catherine Howdle, and Melpo-Menie Joséphidès, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, Avenue de Arts 19H, 1000 Brussels, Belgium.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


Declare that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 10g of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement (Directive (EU)2017/828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 amending Directive 2007/36/EC as regards the encouragement of long-term shareholder engagement), as adapted by Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement, and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed, or in any event, by failing to inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority thereof, and










2.


Order Iceland to bear the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


By the present application, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘ESA’) seeks a declaration from the Court that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 10g of Annex XXII to the EEA Agreement, as adapted by Protocol 1 to that Agreement, and under Article 7 EEA, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed, or in any event, by failing to inform ESA thereof.










—


ESA submits that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7 EEA, by failing to make the Act part of its internal legal order.










—


In a reply dated 15 October 2023 to ESA΄s reasoned opinion of 19 April 2023, Iceland stated that the implementation of the Act was delayed.










—


When the deadline for Iceland to comply with the reasoned opinion expired on 19 June 2023, ESA had received no notification that Iceland had implemented the Act, nor was it in possession of any other information indicating that the Act had been made part of Iceland΄s internal legal order.










—


At the point of lodging of the present application, ESA notes that Iceland has neither made the Act part of its internal legal order, nor has it informed ESA of having done so.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3217/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-174/24: Action brought on 27 March 2024 – Djchem Chemicals Poland and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v Commission
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: classification, environmental protection, labelling, packaging, principle of proportionality, reproductive health, rights of the defence, toxic substance








C_202403342EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3342


3.6.2024






Action brought on 27 March 2024 – Djchem Chemicals Poland and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v Commission


(Case T-174/24)

(C/2024/3342)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Djchem Chemicals Poland S.A. (Wołomin, Poland), The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Akron, Ohio, United States) (represented by: C. Mereu and S. Englebert, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


Annul Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/197 of 19 October 2023 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, (1) insofar as it classifies 1,4-Benzenediamine, N,N’-mixed Ph and tolyl derivs.; Reaction mass of N-phenyl,N’-o-tolyl-phenylene diamine, N,N’-diphenyl-p-phenylene diamine and N,N’-di-o-tolyl-phenylene diamine (‘DAPD’) as toxic for reproduction 1B (H360FD) (‘the contested act’); (2)











—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging a breach of provisions under Regulation EC No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, namely Article 36(1)(d), Article 37(5), Section 1.1.1.3, Section 1.1.1.5, Section 3.7.2.1.1, Section 3.7.2.3.1, and Table 3.7.1(a) of the Annex.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission made a manifest error of assessment. The defendant relied on irrelevant facts, and did not take into account, carefully and impartially, all the relevant and available information on DAPD provided by the applicant before adopting the contested act.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging the contested act infringes the general principles of EU law, namely the principle of proportionality, the applicants’ right to be heard and right of defence, and the principle of good administration.






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ 2008 L 353, p. 1).

(2)  The contested act is published in OJ L 2024/197.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3342/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-173/24: Action brought on 27 March 2024 – DI v Parliament
Date: 2024-03-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, administrative sanction, confidentiality, data protection, disciplinary proceedings, harassment at work, personal data, psychological harassment, rights of the defence








C_202403180EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3180


21.5.2024






Action brought on 27 March 2024 – DI v Parliament


(Case T-173/24)

(C/2024/3180)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: DI (represented by: S. Rodríguez Bajón and A. Gómez-Acebo Dennes, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Decision of 30 January 2024 of the President of the European Parliament finding that the applicant had engaged in psychological harassment;










—


annul the Decision of 30 January 2024 of the President of the European Parliament imposing a reprimand on the applicant for having engaged in conduct amounting to psychological harassment;










—


annul any action related to the above acts;










—


order the European Parliament pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging failure to observe the applicant’s rights of defence and the right to sound administration.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging failure to comply with procedural deadlines.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging misuse of powers.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging error of assessment.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the duty of confidentiality and care in the processing of personal data.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3180/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)