do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-213/25: Action brought on 28 March 2025 – Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO –Oraczewska (100)
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, newspaper, publishing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202502699EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2699


19.5.2025






Action brought on 28 March 2025 – Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO –Oraczewska (100)


(Case T-213/25)

(C/2025/2699)
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z. o. o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: A. Dobosz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Beata Oraczewska (Rzeszów, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark ‘100’ – EU trade mark No 3 875 408
         

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2025 in Case R 1052/2024-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision of EUIPO of 27 January 2025 in its entirety and rule that the application for a declaration of invalidity of trade mark EUTM 003875408 ‘100’ should be rejected in its entirety;










—


order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and – on the basis of Article 190(2) of the Rules of Procedure – the costs necessarily incurred by the applicant for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










—


in the event that the intervener joins the proceedings, rule that she must cover her own costs for the purposes of those proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1) in conjunction with Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2699/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-239/25, Fincontinuo: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Palermo (Italy) lodged on 28 March 2025 – Fincontinuo SpA v LF
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer information, cost of borrowing, credit institution








C_202503500EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3500


7.7.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Palermo (Italy) lodged on 28 March 2025 – Fincontinuo SpA v LF


(Case C-239/25, Fincontinuo)

(C/2025/3500)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Giudice di pace di Palermo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Fincontinuo SpA

Defendant: LF

Questions referred







1)


In the context of national legislation providing for transparency and verification instruments that require lending institutions to quantify and apportion costs, in a transparent manner, according to their nature, dependent or non-dependent on the duration of the agreement, and to inform the consumer in advance, inter alia, by means of the SECCI form, does the system provided for in Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/48/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008, as interpreted by the Court of Justice in the Lexitor judgment (C-383/18) and in the light also of the principles expressed by the Court in the Unicredit Austria (C-555/21) and Santander (C-76/22) judgments, preclude an interpretation of that national legislation under which the reimbursement to the consumer of the ‘total cost of the credit’ covers only costs indicated as dependent on the duration of the credit agreement in the transparency documentation provided to the consumer?










2)


Do the provisions of Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 preclude an interpretation of national legislation under which, in the event of reimbursement to the consumer of the ‘total cost of the credit’, the lending institute is not required to reduce proportionately the costs relating to the activities carried out by third parties during the pre-contractual stage, whether the relevant amounts are paid directly by the consumer or indirectly through the lending institute?










3)


Does the general principle of EU law prohibiting unjust enrichment and Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 preclude an interpretation of national legislation according to which the reimbursement to the consumer of the ‘total cost of the credit’ also includes costs which are not dependent on the duration of the agreement and are payable in respect of services which have already been fully performed at the time of the early repayment of the credit, even where transparent and detailed information has been provided?






(1)  Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ 2008, L 133, p. 66).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3500/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-212/25: Action brought on 28 March 2025 – Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO –Oraczewska (100)
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, newspaper, publishing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202502698EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2698


19.5.2025






Action brought on 28 March 2025 – Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO –Oraczewska (100)


(Case T-212/25)

(C/2025/2698)
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z. o. o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: A. Dobosz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Beata Oraczewska (Rzeszów, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark ‘100’ – EU trade mark No 3 419 322
         

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2025 in Case R 1050/2024-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision of EUIPO of 27 January 2025 in its entirety and rule that the application for a declaration of invalidity of trade mark EUTM 003 419 322
                  ‘100’ should be rejected in its entirety;










—


order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs of the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and – on the basis of Article 190(2) of the Rules of Procedure – the costs necessarily incurred by the applicant for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










—


in the event that the intervener joins the proceedings, rule that she must cover her own costs for the purposes of those proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1) in conjunction with Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council










—


Failure to comply with the principle of legal certainty.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2698/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-243/25, ING Bank Śląski: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Przemyślu (Poland) lodged on 28 March 2025 – M. H. v ING Bank Śląski S.A.
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, interest, unfair terms of contract








C_202503501EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3501


7.7.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Przemyślu (Poland) lodged on 28 March 2025 – M. H. v ING Bank Śląski S.A.


(Case C-243/25, ING Bank Śląski)

(C/2025/3501)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy w Przemyślu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: M. H.

Defendant: ING Bank Śląski S.A.

Questions referred







(1)


Must Article 3(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (1) be interpreted as meaning that a contractual term can be regarded as unfair for the sole reason that, as regards the variable rate of interest on a loan, it refers to a benchmark, the amount of which is set forth by a third party, which in that regard is not subject to proper institutional supervision under the generally applicable provisions – in force at the time of conclusion of the contract – and the lender has indirect influence on the amount of that benchmark?










(2)


Must Article 4(2) of [Directive 93/13/EEC] be interpreted as meaning that the drafting in plain, intelligible language of the terms concerning the principal obligations of the parties includes an obligation on the trader to inform the consumer of a potential economic risk associated with the lack of appropriate provisions of national law – at the time of conclusion of the contract – concerning the supervision of a third party which sets forth the amount of the benchmark used to set the amount of the consumer’s obligation?






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3501/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.117215
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Czechia, State aid, control of State aid, electricity supply, energy distribution, energy industry, energy production, regions of the Czech Republic








C_202501949EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1949


28.3.2025






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.117215
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/1949)








Date of adoption of the decision


7.3.2025




Aid number


SA.117215




Member State


Czechia




Region


Praha, Střední Čechy, Jihozápad, Severozápad, Severovýchod, Jihovýchod, Střední Morava, Moravskoslezsko




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Modernisation Fund TCTF Aid for energy storage




Legal basis


Modernisation fund general programme document approved by the Czech Government on 25 January 2021 and revised on 20 December 2023.




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Energy infrastructures, Renewable energy




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 7 000 000 000  CZK
Annual budget: 7 000 000 000  CZK




Intensity


50.0%




Duration


Until 31.12.2025




Economic sectors


Electric power generation, transmission and distribution




Name and address of the granting authority







State Environmental Fund of Czech Republic ("State Environmental Fund")




Olbrachtova 2006/9, CZ-140 00 Prague, Czech Republic








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/2025/1949/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11899 – SRI/DUNLOP TIRE BUSINESS) – Candidate case for simplified procedure
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Europe, North America, Oceania, economic concentration, industrial product, marketing, merger control, rubber industry, sports equipment








C_202501990EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1990


28.3.2025






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11899 – SRI/DUNLOP TIRE BUSINESS)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/1990)


1.   
On 18 March 2025, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Ltd., (‘SRI’, Japan),










—


Dunlop Tire Business (‘Dunlop’, US), controlled by The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (‘Goodyear’, US).




SRI will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Dunlop.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets and shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


SRI is a global Japanese manufacturer specializing in tires, sports equipment, and industrial rubber products (rubber gloves, rubber medicine, floor coatings, etc.). In its tire business, SRI manufactures tires under the Falken, Sumitomo, and Dunlop brands, and










—


The Dunlop Tire Business consists of the Dunlop brand, comprising trademarks and intangible assets necessary for the marketing, sale, and distribution of Dunlop-branded consumer, commercial, and other specialty tires in Europe, North America, and Oceania.






3.   
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified treatment for certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.11899 – SRI/DUNLOP TIRE BUSINESS
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  
            OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  
            OJ C 160, 5.5.2023, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1990/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation 1008/2008 of the European parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community – Establishment of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: Brussels region, Cyprus, air transport, intra-EU transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_202501995EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1995


28.3.2025






Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation 1008/2008 of the European parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Establishment of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/1995)







Member State


Cyprus




Route concerned


Larnaka(LCA) – Brussels(BRU) - Larnaka(LCA)




Date of entry into force of the public service obligation


1 November 2025




Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained







Department of Civil Aviation




27, Pindarou Str.




Alpha Business Centre




Nicosia




CYPRUS




Tel. +357 22404139
Fax +357 22766552
Internet: http://www.mcw.gov.cy/mcw/dca/

For the attention of: Mr. Panos Hadjiyiasemis
Email: director@dca.mcw.gov.cy, phadjiyiasemis@mcw.gov.cy.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1995/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-241/25, Société Générale: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 28 March 2025 – Société Générale SA v Skatteverket
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: corporation tax, free movement of capital, group of companies, loss, profit, revenue, tax collection, tax law








C_202502849EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2849


2.6.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 28 March 2025 – Société Générale SA v Skatteverket


(Case C-241/25, Société Générale)

(C/2025/2849)
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Société Générale SA

Respondent: Skatteverket

Questions referred







1.


Is it compatible with Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union for a State of taxation at source to require a non-resident company, which is subject to taxation at source on dividends and which claims that it is in a situation that is objectively comparable to that of a resident loss-making company, to show that circumstance by recalculating its taxable profit or loss in accordance with the rules applied by the State of taxation at source to taxation on the revenue of resident companies?










2.


If the non-resident company is subject to consolidated taxation, is it compatible with Article 63 TFEU for a State of taxation at source to require the profit or loss of the tax group as a whole to be taken into account when determining whether the company is in a situation that is objectively comparable to that of a resident loss-making company?










3.


Is the reply to question 2 affected if the State of taxation at source does not have rules on consolidated taxation but by contrast does have rules on intra-group transfers which, in certain circumstances, make profit and loss compensation within the group possible?






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2849/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11912 – M&G FA / P CAPITAL PARTNERS) – Candidate case for simplified procedure
Date: 2025-03-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Northern Europe, economic concentration, financial services, investment company, life assurance, merger control








C_202501948EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/1948


28.3.2025






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11912 – M&G FA / P CAPITAL PARTNERS)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/1948)


1.   
On 20 March 2025, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


M&G FA Limited (‘M&G FA’, United Kingdom), controlled by M&G plc (‘M&G’, United Kingdom),










—


P Capital Partners AB (‘PCP’, Sweden), controlled by PCP Deka AB (Sweden).




M&G FA will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of PCP.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


M&G FA is a subsidiary of M&G, a global savings and investments manager based in the United Kingdom, offering financial products and services across Europe through two business segments: Asset Management and Life,










—


PCP is a private credit fund manager based in Sweden, providing active management services for primarily institutional investors in its closed-ended funds. PCP operates mainly in Northern Europe.






3.   
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified treatment for certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.11912 – M&G FA / P CAPITAL PARTNERS
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  
            OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  
            OJ C 160, 5.5.2023, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1948/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)