do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-172/25, Personal Sea Management: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța (Romania) lodged on 27 February 2025 – CP, Personal Sea Management SRL v Sulina Logistics SRL
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: dismissal, equal treatment, labour law, temporary employment agency, work contract








C_202503392EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3392


30.6.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța (Romania) lodged on 27 February 2025 – CP, Personal Sea Management SRL v Sulina Logistics SRL


(Case C-172/25, Personal Sea Management)

(C/2025/3392)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Constanța

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: CP, Personal Sea Management SRL

Respondent: Sulina Logistics SRL

Question referred

Must Article 5(1) of Directive 2008/104/EC (1) concerning the ‘principle of equal treatment’, read in conjunction with Article 2 of that directive, be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides that one of the grounds for terminating the individual contract of employment of a worker, who is employed by a temporary-work agency, is discontinuation by the user of the worker’s services, in a situation where that discontinuation does not have to be justified in any way and is not subject to any formal condition, and where, for the temporary-work agency, such a discontinuation in itself constitutes a sufficient ground for dismissal, whereas, if the user had engaged the worker itself, that user would have been subject to statutory requirements concerning the justification of the reason for the dismissal and the formal conditions in respect of the act of dismissal?


(1)  Directive 2008/104/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on temporary agency work (OJ 2008 L 327, p. 9).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3392/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-85/24, BAWAG: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof – Austria) – Verein für Konsumenteninformation v BAWAG P.S.K. Bank für Arbeit und Wirtschaft und Österreichische Postsparkasse AG (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property – Directive 2014/17/EU – Article 13(1)(g) – General information on home loan products – Obligation to provide a representative example – Directive 2005/29/EC – Article 7 – Banking institution offering different variants of loans – Information sheet including only examples of variable rate credit agreements)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, interest, mortgage, real estate credit








C_202502171EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2171


22.4.2025






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof – Austria) – Verein für Konsumenteninformation v BAWAG P.S.K. Bank für Arbeit und Wirtschaft und Österreichische Postsparkasse AG


(Case C-85/24,
                (1)
BAWAG)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property - Directive 2014/17/EU - Article 13(1)(g) - General information on home loan products - Obligation to provide a ‘representative example’ - Directive 2005/29/EC - Article 7 - Banking institution offering different variants of loans - Information sheet including only examples of variable rate credit agreements)
(C/2025/2171)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant on a point of law: Verein für Konsumenteninformation

Defendant and respondent on a point of law: BAWAG P.S.K. Bank für Arbeit und Wirtschaft und Österreichische Postsparkasse AG

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13(1)(g) of Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
must be interpreted as meaning that a creditor who offers, for the purpose of financing the construction of a dwelling, credit agreements, whether or not secured by a mortgage, at a fixed interest rate, at a variable interest rate or with alternating variable interest rate and fixed interest rate periods, is required to provide, in the general information, only one example of the loans it offers, provided that that example is representative.


(1)  OJ C C/2024/2594.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2171/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-638/23, Amt der Tiroler Landesregierung: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof – Austria) – Amt der Tiroler Lndesregierung v Datenschutzbehörde (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data – Regulation (EU) 2016/679 – Article 4(7) – Concept of controller – Direct designation of the controller by national law – Auxiliary administrative entity in the service of a regional government – Lack of legal personality – Lack of legal capacity of the entity’s own – Determination of the purposes and means of the processing)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data protection, data-processing law, disclosure of information, legal status, personal data, public authorities








C_202502166EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2166


22.4.2025






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof – Austria) – Amt der Tiroler Lndesregierung v Datenschutzbehörde


(Case C-638/23,
                (1)
Amt der Tiroler Landesregierung)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data - Regulation (EU) 2016/679 - Article 4(7) - Concept of ‘controller’ - Direct designation of the controller by national law - Auxiliary administrative entity in the service of a regional government - Lack of legal personality - Lack of legal capacity of the entity’s own - Determination of the purposes and means of the processing)
(C/2025/2166)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Amt der Tiroler Landesregierung

Defendant: Datenschutzbehörde

In the presence of: Bundesministerin für Justiz

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which designates, as controller, an auxiliary administrative entity lacking legal personality and legal capacity of its own, without specifying, in a precise manner, the specific processing operations of personal data for which that entity is responsible or the purpose of those operations in so far as, first, such an entity is able to fulfil, in accordance with that national legislation, the obligations on a controller towards data subjects with respect to the protection of personal data and, second, that national legislation determines, explicitly or at least implicitly, the scope of the processing of personal data for which that entity is responsible.


(1)  OJ C C/2024/712.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2166/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.115472
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Slovakia, State aid, carriage of goods, control of State aid, inland waterway transport, rail transport, regions of Slovakia, road transport, storage








C_202501374EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1374


27.2.2025






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.115472
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/1374)








Date of adoption of the decision


13.2.2025




Aid number


SA.115472




Member State


Slovakia




Region


Bratislavský kraj, Západné Slovensko, Stredné Slovensko, Východné Slovensko




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Investment aid scheme for the construction and modernisation of intermodal terminals and transhipment points




Legal basis


Measure Act No 121/2022 on contributions from European Union funds and on the amendment of certain laws of 16 March 2022 in its latest version as effective from 1 August 2024 and Administrative Act named ‘State aid scheme to support the construction and modernisation of intermodal terminals and intermodal transport transhipment points under the Programme Slovakia’ adopted by the General Director of the Strategy and Planning Section of the Ministry of Transport of the Slovak Republic in August 2024.




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Coordination of transport, Energy efficiency, Environmental protection, Sectorial development




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 30 000 000  EUR
Annual budget: 10 000 000  EUR




Intensity


49,0 %




Duration


Until 31.12.2027




Economic sectors


Freight rail transport, Freight transport by road and removal services, Inland freight water transport, Warehousing and storage, Support activities for transportation




Name and address of the granting authority







Ministerstvo dopravy SR




Námestie slobody 6, 810 05 Bratislava








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/2025/1374/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-595/24 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 27 February 2025 – Capgemini España and UniSystems Luxembourg v EUIPO (Interim relief – Public supply contracts – Provision of advisory services – Application for interim measures – No urgency)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: consultancy, framework agreement, information technology, services contract








C_202502222EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2222


22.4.2025






Order of the President of the General Court of 27 February 2025 – Capgemini España and UniSystems Luxembourg v EUIPO


(Case T-595/24 R)

(Interim relief - Public supply contracts - Provision of advisory services - Application for interim measures - No urgency)
(C/2025/2222)
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 (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė, M.A. Asensio Murciano and R. Modesto Damião, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, the applicants seek, in essence, suspension of the operation of the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 November 2024 to award the framework contract bearing the reference EUIPO/2024/OP/0007 to three successful tenderers, suspension of the operation of the decision of 18 November 2024 to implicitly reject the applicants’ complaint, suspension of the signature of that framework contract and, in the event that that contract has already been signed, that the execution of that contract be suspended.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The order of 26 November 2024, Capgemini España and UniSystems Luxembourg v EUIPO (T-595/24 R, not published) is cancelled.










3.


The costs are reserved.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2222/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 26 February 2025
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202500798EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/798


27.2.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            26 February 2025
         
(C/2025/798)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0487 




JPY


Japanese yen


156,70 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4584 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82868 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,1430 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9392 




ISK


Iceland króna


145,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,6895 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,948 




HUF


Hungarian forint


400,30 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1440 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9773 




TRY


Turkish lira


38,2126 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6622 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5054 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,1516 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8419 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4035 




KRW


South Korean won


1 504,35 




ZAR


South African rand


19,2857 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6125 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


17 171,68 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6447 




PHP


Philippine peso


60,733 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


35,388 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,0329 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4685 




INR


Indian rupee


91,3495 






(1)  
            Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/798/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-140/25: Action brought on 27 February 2025 – Variuscard v EUIPO (CRYPTOSTAMP)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, blockchain, computer assisted design, electronic money, printing, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_202501907EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1907


7.4.2025






Action brought on 27 February 2025 – Variuscard v EUIPO (CRYPTOSTAMP)


(Case T-140/25)

(C/2025/1907)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Variuscard Produktions- und Handels GmbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: A. Koller, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for registration of a European Union word mark – Application No 18 937 926
         

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 December 2024 in Case R 1585/2024-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul or, where appropriate, alter the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings before the General Court and the costs of the appeal proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


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










—


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/2025/1907/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-562/23, T – 2: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije – Slovenia) – T – 2 družba za ustvarjanje, razvoj in trženje elektronskih komunikacij in opreme d.o.o. v Agencija za komunikacijska omrežja in storitve Republike Slovenije (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Authorisation of electronic communications networks and services – Harmonised radio spectrum – Individual rights of use for a limited period – Extension of those rights – Directive 2002/20/EC – Article 5(2) – Directive 2002/20, as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC – Article 5(2) – European Electronic Communications Code – Directive (EU) 2018/1972 – Article 49(1) and (2) – Temporal applicability)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: direct applicability, radio telecommunications, regulation of telecommunications, transmission network, waveband








C_202502051EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2051


14.4.2025






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije – Slovenia) – T – 2 družba za ustvarjanje, razvoj in trženje elektronskih komunikacij in opreme d.o.o. v Agencija za komunikacijska omrežja in storitve Republike Slovenije


(Case C-562/23,
                (1)
T – 2)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Authorisation of electronic communications networks and services - Harmonised radio spectrum - Individual rights of use for a limited period - Extension of those rights - Directive 2002/20/EC - Article 5(2) - Directive 2002/20, as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC - Article 5(2) - European Electronic Communications Code - Directive (EU) 2018/1972 - Article 49(1) and (2) - Temporal applicability)
(C/2025/2051)
Language of the case: Slovenian

Referring court

Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: T – 2 družba za ustvarjanje, razvoj in trženje elektronskih komunikacij in opreme d.o.o.

Defendant: Agencija za komunikacijska omrežja in storitve Republike Slovenije

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49(1) and (2) of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code does not apply to the extension of the duration of individual rights of use for radio spectrum falling under that paragraph 2 and granted before the date of entry into force of that directive, but which expire after that date.


(1)  OJ C C/2023/752.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2051/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-16/24, Sinalov: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad – Bulgaria) – Criminal proceedings against YR, WV, AN, WY (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Effective judicial protection – National rules on how cases are allocated among the judges of a given court – Allocation of cases by the head of court management – Power of the judge assigned to verify the lawfulness of the allocation)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: independence of the judiciary, judge, judicial review, right to an effective remedy








C_202502169EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2169


22.4.2025






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad – Bulgaria) – Criminal proceedings against YR, WV, AN, WY


(Case C-16/24,
                (1)
Sinalov)
                (2)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU - Effective judicial protection - National rules on how cases are allocated among the judges of a given court - Allocation of cases by the head of court management - Power of the judge assigned to verify the lawfulness of the allocation)
(C/2025/2169)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski gradski sad

Parties in the main proceedings

YR, WV, AN, WY

other party: Sofiyska gradska prokuratura

Operative part of the judgment

The second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
must be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member State has established a system for allocating cases within courts which is based on the principle of the random selection of the formation of the court, with certain exceptions, and is subject to the involvement of the head of court management of each court, it does not preclude, where a judge to whom a case has been allocated has doubts as to the lawfulness of that allocation, that judge from being prevented from ruling himself or herself on that question and, if necessary, from referring that case to another judge in the same court on the ground that it should have been allocated to that judge, while the first judge must refer the case concerned back to the head of court management of that court, so that he or she may verify the lawfulness of the initial allocation of that case and possibly proceed to the reallocation of that case. However, the lawfulness of an allocation made by that head of court management must be subject to judicial review in accordance with the rules of national law.


(1)  OJ C C/2024/2590.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2169/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-128/24: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 – European Commission v Hellenic Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Environment – Directive 2014/89/EU – Maritime spatial planning – Article 8(1) – Obligation to set up maritime spatial plans – Article 14(1) – Obligation to send copies of the maritime spatial plans to the European Commission and to any other Member States concerned)
Date: 2025-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: area management, conservation of resources, infringement of EU law, management of resources, maritime area, national implementing measure, resources of the sea, spatial data, sustainable development








C_202502172EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2172


22.4.2025






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 27 February 2025 – European Commission v Hellenic Republic


(Case C-128/24)
                (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Environment - Directive 2014/89/EU - Maritime spatial planning - Article 8(1) - Obligation to set up maritime spatial plans - Article 14(1) - Obligation to send copies of the maritime spatial plans to the European Commission and to any other Member States concerned)
(C/2025/2172)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Konstantinidis and F. Le Bot, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: S. Chala, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that the Hellenic Republic,






—


by failing to set up a maritime spatial plan by 31 March 2021 and










—


by failing to send copies of that plan to the European Commission and to any other Member States concerned within three months of its publication,




has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8(1) and Article 15(3), as well as Article 14(1), of Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning;










2.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C C/2024/2415.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2172/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)