do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-621/23 P: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 May 2025 – Luossavaara-Kiirunavaara v Commission (Appeal – Environment – Directive 2003/87/EC – System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the European Union – Free allocation of allowances – Article 10a(1) – Concept of substitutes – National implementing measures – Article 11(1) – Lists of installations covered by Directive 2003/87 submitted to the European Commission by the Member States – Decision (EU) 2021/355 – Proposal of the Member State concerned to cover by a benchmark for sintered ore a sub-installation producing iron ore pellets – Rejection decision – Establishment of benchmarks by the Commission – General objective of incentivising the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions – No obligation of result – Article 296 TFEU – Obligation to state reasons for decisions of the EU institutions)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, EU emission allowance, greenhouse gas, industrial pollution, reduction of gas emissions, tradeable emission permit








C_202503857EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3857


21.7.2025






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 May 2025 – Luossavaara-Kiirunavaara v Commission


(Case C-621/23 P)
                (1)

(Appeal - Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the European Union - Free allocation of allowances - Article 10a(1) - Concept of ‘substitutes’ - National implementing measures - Article 11(1) - Lists of installations covered by Directive 2003/87 submitted to the European Commission by the Member States - Decision (EU) 2021/355 - Proposal of the Member State concerned to cover by a benchmark for sintered ore a sub-installation producing iron ore pellets - Rejection decision - Establishment of benchmarks by the Commission - General objective of incentivising the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions - No obligation of result - Article 296 TFEU - Obligation to state reasons for decisions of the EU institutions)
(C/2025/3857)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Luossavaara-Kiirunavaara AB (represented by: A. Bryngelsson, A. Johansson and F. Sjövall, advokater)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. De Meester and G. Wils, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: C. Meyer-Seitz and R. Shahsavan Eriksson, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Luossavaara-Kiirunavaara AB to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C, C/2023/967.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3857/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-213/23: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 May 2025 – Commission v Netherlands (Open Data Directive and the re-use of public sector information) (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 258 TFEU – Directive (EU) 2019/1024 – Open data and the re-use of public sector information – Incomplete transposition of that directive and failure to notify the transposition measures immediately – Article 260(3) TFEU – Application for imposition of a lump sum and a daily penalty payment – Discontinuance in part)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to information, national implementing measure, open data, public data, right to reuse information, sanction (EU)








C_202503852EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3852


21.7.2025






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 May 2025 – Commission v Netherlands (Open Data Directive and the re-use of public sector information)


(Case C-213/23)
                (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 258 TFEU - Directive (EU) 2019/1024 - Open data and the re-use of public sector information - Incomplete transposition of that directive and failure to notify the transposition measures immediately - Article 260(3) TFEU - Application for imposition of a lump sum and a daily penalty payment - Discontinuance in part)
(C/2025/3852)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P.-J. Loewenthal and U. Małecka, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: E. M. M. Besselink, M. K. Bulterman and J. M. Hoogveld, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing, on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion of the European Commission of 6 April 2022, to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information, and, consequently, by failing to notify those provisions to the Commission, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 17 of that directive;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the European Commission a lump sum in the amount of EUR 10 000 000;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  
            OJ C 216, 19.6.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3852/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Special report 14/2025: Developing supplementary pensions in the EU – EU action not effective in strengthening occupational pensions and establishing a pan-European personal pension product
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU Member State, European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority, capital market, consumer information, investment promotion, pension fund, regulation of investments, single market, supplementary pension








C_202502811EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2811


22.5.2025






Special report 14/2025:

            ‘Developing supplementary pensions in the EU – EU action not effective in strengthening occupational pensions and establishing a pan-European personal pension product’
         
(C/2025/2811)

The European Court of Auditors has published its special report 14/2025: ‘Developing supplementary pensions in the EU – EU action not effective in strengthening occupational pensions and establishing a pan-European personal pension product’.
The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/publications/sr-2025-14.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2811/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11983 – INFLEXION / 65 EQUITY PARTNERS / KEE SAFETY)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, industrial equipment, investment company, machinery, merger control, protective equipment, wholesale trade








C_202503126EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3126


28.5.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11983 – INFLEXION / 65 EQUITY PARTNERS / KEE SAFETY)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/3126)

On 22 May 2025, 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 32025M11983. 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/2025/3126/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-347/25, Zapp: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 22 May 2025 – Zapp Precision Metals GmbH, Zapp AG v KU
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, board of management, control of restrictive practices, damages, infringement of EU law, legal person, restriction on competition








C_202504437EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4437


18.8.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 22 May 2025 – Zapp Precision Metals GmbH, Zapp AG v KU


(Case C-347/25, Zapp)

(C/2025/4437)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants, appellants in the appeal on a point of law and respondents in the cross-appeal on a point of law: Zapp Precision Metals GmbH, Zapp AG

Defendant, respondent in the appeal on a point of law and appellant in the cross-appeal on a point of law: KU

Intervener for the defendant: AIG Europe S.A.

Question referred

Does Article 101 TFEU preclude a provision in national law under which a legal person on which a national competition authority has imposed a fine for an infringement of Article 101 TFEU committed by its management body may claim compensation from the management body for the damage the legal person has suffered as a result?


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4437/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
P10_TA(2025)0112 – Euratom Research and Training Programme for the period 2026-2027 complementing Horizon Europe – European Parliament legislative resolution of 22 May 2025 on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the Research and Training Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community for the period 2026-2027 complementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation and repealing Council Regulation (Euratom) 2021/765 (COM(2025)0060 – C10-0052/2025 – 2025/0035(NLE)) (Consultation)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Committee on Budgets, Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, European Parliament
Subjects: EAEC, EU programme, EU research policy, Framework Programme for Research and Development, innovation, nuclear research, nuclear safety, nuclear technology, research and development, vocational training








C_202506225EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6225


2.12.2025






P10_TA(2025)0112
Euratom Research and Training Programme for the period 2026-2027 complementing Horizon Europe
European Parliament legislative resolution of 22 May 2025 on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the Research and Training Programme of the European Atomic Energy Community for the period 2026-2027 complementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation and repealing Council Regulation (Euratom) 2021/765 (COM(2025)0060 – C10-0052/2025 – 2025/0035(NLE))
(Consultation)
(C/2025/6225)



The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2025)0060),










—


having regard to Article 7 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C10-0052/2025),










—


having regard to Rule 84 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0083/2025),










1.


Approves the Commission proposal;










2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;










3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;










4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.







ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6225/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-322/25: Action brought on 22 May 2025 – Varaut v Parliament
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, Secretary General of an Institution, conflict of interest, parliamentary allowance, servant (EU)








C_202503913EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3913


21.7.2025






Action brought on 22 May 2025 – Varaut v Parliament


(Case T-322/25)

(C/2025/3913)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Alexandre Varaut (Paris, France) (represented by: D. Dassa-Le Deist, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 31 March 2025 of the Secretary-General of the European Parliament;










—


order the assumption of the contract of [confidential] (1) as of 2 September 2024 as signed and presented;










—


consequently, order that the applicant be reimbursed for the sums which he had to pay in place of the Parliament for the contract of [confidential] from 2 September 2024 until 31 March 2025 as a result of the contested decision, namely a total amount of EUR 18 408,28;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the applicant the sum of EUR 10 000 in respect of the non-recoverable costs he has incurred;










—


order the European Parliament to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action against the Parliament’s decision refusing to assume a local parliamentary assistant’s contract, the applicant puts forward three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in that the Parliament relies on a risk of conflict of interest. The definition of a conflict of interest bears no relation to the factual situation.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment in that the Parliament relies on a risk that the time financed for that assistant will be used for personal purposes, which constitutes, a priori, a completely unjustified suspicion.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that it is not for the Secretary-General of the Parliament to the change the measures implementing the Statute for Members of the Parliament and to create legal uncertainty. In support of that plea, the applicant maintains that his assistant’s work is organised into two distinct periods of time which are easy to monitor. Moreover, he claims that the same situation has existed in the past without posing any problems.






(1)  Confidential information omitted.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3913/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11896 – CARNIVAL / RCCL / MSC / GBSY JV)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Bahamas, economic concentration, holding company, joint venture, logistics, maintenance, merger control, pleasure craft, shipbuilding








C_202503122EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3122


28.5.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11896 – CARNIVAL / RCCL / MSC / GBSY JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/3122)

On 22 May 2025, 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 32025M11896. 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/2025/3122/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-237/23: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 May 2025 – Commission v Bulgaria (Open Data Directive and the re-use of public sector information) (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 258 TFEU – Directive (EU) 2019/1024 – Open data and the re-use of public sector information – Incomplete transposition of that directive and failure to notify the transposition measures immediately – Article 260(3) TFEU – Application for the imposition of a lump sum and a daily penalty payment – Discontinuance in part)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to information, national implementing measure, open data, public data, right to reuse information, sanction (EU)








C_202503854EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3854


21.7.2025






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 May 2025 – Commission v Bulgaria (Open Data Directive and the re-use of public sector information)


(Case C-237/23)
                (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 258 TFEU - Directive (EU) 2019/1024 - Open data and the re-use of public sector information - Incomplete transposition of that directive and failure to notify the transposition measures immediately - Article 260(3) TFEU - Application for the imposition of a lump sum and a daily penalty payment - Discontinuance in part)
(C/2025/3854)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: U. Małecka, L. Malferrari and N. Nikolova, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Bulgaria (represented by: T. Mitova and S. Ruseva, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing, on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned order of the European Commission of 6 April 2022, to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive (EU) 2019/1024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information, and, consequently, by failing to notify those provisions to the Commission, the Republic of Bulgaria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 17 of that directive;










2.


Orders the Republic of Bulgaria to pay the European Commission a lump sum in the amount of EUR 900 000;










3.


Orders the Republic of Bulgaria to pay its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  
            OJ C 205, 12.6.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3854/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-346/25, Fibo Markets: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 22 May 2025 – FIBO MARKETS Limited
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: contract, financial instrument, fixing of prices, private international law








C_202504142EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4142


4.8.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 22 May 2025 – FIBO MARKETS Limited


(Case C-346/25, Fibo Markets)

(C/2025/4142)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud

Parties to the main proceedings


The appellant and defendant at first instance: FIBO MARKETS Limited

Other party to the appeal proceedings on a point of law and applicant at first instance: J. P.

Question referred

Is Article 6(4)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) to be interpreted as meaning that the rights and obligations which constitute a financial instrument include rights and obligations concerning the process of setting prices in contracts for differences, or the process of establishing the difference between the prices of underlying assets in respect of which the contract for difference is concluded?


(1)  
            OJ 2008 L 177, p. 6.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4142/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-213/24: Order of the General Court of 22 May 2025 – Cortex v Commission (Action for annulment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine – Prohibition for any non-Russian-registered aircraft which is owned or chartered, or otherwise controlled by any Russian natural or legal person, entity or body, to land in, take off from or overfly the territory of the Union – Articles 3d and 12 of Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 – Act not amenable to review – Inadmissibility)
Date: 2025-05-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, air traffic control, aircraft, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person








C_202504464EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4464


18.8.2025






Order of the General Court of 22 May 2025 – Cortex v Commission


(Case T-213/24)
                (1)

(Action for annulment - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine - Prohibition for any non-Russian-registered aircraft which is owned or chartered, or otherwise controlled by any Russian natural or legal person, entity or body, to land in, take off from or overfly the territory of the Union - Articles 3d and 12 of Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 - Act not amenable to review - Inadmissibility)
(C/2025/4464)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Cortex Havacilik ve Turizm Ticaret AŞ (Kepez, Türkiye) (represented by: R. Antonini, E. Monard, B. Maniatis and E. Zachari, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Bruti Liberati, M. Carpus-Carcea and B. Sasinowska, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision contained in the email of the European Commission of 29 March 2024 which, it is claimed, prohibited the aircraft that it operates from landing in, taking off from or overflying the territory of the Union pursuant to Articles 3d and 12 of Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 229, p. 1), as amended.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications to intervene of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Poland.










3.


Cortex Havacilik ve Turizm Ticaret AŞ shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief.










4.


The Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Poland shall bear their own costs relating to their respective application to intervene.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2024/3488, 10.6.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4464/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)