do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-595/24: Action brought on 22 November 2024 – Capgemini España and UniSystems Luxembourg v EUIPO
Date: 2024-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, equal treatment, framework agreement, information technology, withdrawal from an agreement








C_202500576EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/576


3.2.2025






Action brought on 22 November 2024 – Capgemini España and UniSystems Luxembourg v EUIPO


(Case T-595/24)

(C/2025/576)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Capgemini España, SL (Madrid, Spain), UniSystems Luxembourg Sàrl (Bertrange, Luxembourg) (represented by: T. Dal Farra and E. Caupert, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the decision awarding Framework Agreement No EUIPO/2024/OP/0007 to the three successful tenderers, set out in EUIPO’s letter dated 6 November 2024;










—


annul the decision implicitly rejecting the complaint made by the companies Capgemini España SL and UniSystems Luxembourg Sàrl, characterised by EUIPO’s failure to respond in the three days following receipt of their letter of complaint dated 16 November 2024;










—


annul the decision to sign Framework Agreement No EUIPO/2024/OP/0007;










—


in the event that Framework Agreement No EUIPO/2024/OP/0007 has already been signed, annul that contract;










—


order EUIPO to pay all of the costs.





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 distortion of the tender submitted by the applicants. The applicants argue that that modification constitutes a breach of the principle of equal treatment.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging error of assessment on the part of EUIPO in the analysis of the various tenders.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging irregularity in the successive extensions of the deadline for the submission of tenders.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/576/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11792 – APHEON / LFPI / ECH)
Date: 2024-11-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: France, beverage, condiment, consumer goods, economic concentration, foodstuff, investment company, merger control, preserved product, tobacco, wholesale trade








C_202407198EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/7198


28.11.2024






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11792 – APHEON / LFPI / ECH)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/7198)

On 22 November 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 32024M11792. 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/2024/7198/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-597/24: Action brought on 22 November 2024 – Khudaynatov v Council
Date: 2024-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, entrepreneur, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality, right to an effective remedy








C_202500577EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/577


3.2.2025






Action brought on 22 November 2024 – Khudaynatov v Council


(Case T-597/24)

(C/2025/577)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Eduard Yurevich Khudaynatov (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: T. Bontinck, M. Brésart, J. Goffin, D. Rovetta and M. Moretto, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/2456 of 12 September 2024 in so far as it maintains the applicant’s name on the list in the annex to Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/883 of 3 June 2022 including the applicant’s name in that annex;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2455 of 12 September 2024 in so far as it maintains the applicant’s name on the list in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 269/2014, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2022/878 of 3 June 2022;










—


in the alternative, declare unlawful the listing criterion provided for in Article 1(1)(e) and Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP and in Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) 2014/269 as amended, respectively, by Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1094 of 5 June 2023 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine and Council Regulation (EU) 2023/1089 of 5 June 2023 amending Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine in so far as it concerns leading businesspersons operating in Russia or businesspersons, legal persons, entities or bodies involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation, which is responsible for the annexation of Crimea and the destabilisation of Ukraine.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging breach of the duty to state reasons and violation of the right to effective judicial protection.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging an error of assessment.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality and violation of the fundamental rights of the applicant.










4.


In the alternative, fourth plea in law, based on the reservations made by the applicant on the legality of the first part of criterion (g) in so far as it establishes an irrebuttable presumption.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/577/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-643/24, CREDIDAM: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 22 November 2024 – Centrul Român pentru Administrarea Drepturilor Artiștilor Interpreți (CREDIDAM) v Cristian General Serv SRL
Date: 2024-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: VAT, copyright, provision of services, remuneration of work, tax law, work of art








C_202500742EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/742


10.2.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 22 November 2024 – Centrul Român pentru Administrarea Drepturilor Artiștilor Interpreți (CREDIDAM) v Cristian General Serv SRL


(Case T-643/24, CREDIDAM)

(C/2025/742)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant at first instance and appellant on appeal: Centrul Român pentru Administrarea Drepturilor Artiștilor Interpreți (CREDIDAM)

Defendant at first instance and respondent on appeal: Cristian General Serv SRL

Questions referred







1.


On a proper construction of Article 2(1)(c), Article 24(1), and Article 25(a) of Directive 2006/112/EC, do holders of related rights carry out a supply of services for consideration where the user carries out a communication to the public of protected works in the absence of a licence to that effect?










2.


Does the answer to the first question depend on whether, under national law, the holder of such a related right is not able to object to the uses, being entitled only to the single equitable remuneration, or does it depend on the method of calculation used in determining the amounts due?






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/742/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.112112
Date: 2024-11-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Netherlands, State aid, control of State aid, processing industry








C_202407053EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/7053


22.11.2024






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.112112
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/7053)








Date of adoption of the decision


25.7.2024




Aid number


SA.112112




Member State


Netherlands




Region


Netherlands




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


 




Legal basis


Kaderwet EZK- en LNV-subsidies, call for proposals for additional CO2-reduction through electrification




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Environmental protection




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 750 000 000  EUR




Intensity


 




Duration


25.7.2024 - 31.12.2025




Economic sectors


MANUFACTURING




Name and address of the granting authority







Rijksdienst voor Ondernemend Nederland (RVO)




Prinses Beatrixlaan 2, 2595 AL Den Haag.








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/2024/7053/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)