do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-272/25, Flightright: Order of the General Court (Chamber giving preliminary rulings) of 20 August 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Königs Wusterhausen – Germany) – Flightright GmbH v Ryanair DAC (Air transport – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Compensation and assistance to passengers – Long delay of a flight – Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation – Extraordinary circumstances – Delayed allocation of departure slots due to capacity problems in the airspace)
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: carriage of passengers, civil aviation, indemnification, transport capacity, traveller








C_202505715EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5715


3.11.2025






Order of the General Court (Chamber giving preliminary rulings) of 20 August 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Königs Wusterhausen – Germany) – Flightright GmbH v Ryanair DAC


(Case T-272/25,
                (1)
Flightright)

(Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Compensation and assistance to passengers - Long delay of a flight - Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation - Extraordinary circumstances - Delayed allocation of departure slots due to capacity problems in the airspace)
(C/2025/5715)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Königs Wusterhausen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Flightright GmbH

Defendant: Ryanair DAC

Operative part of the order

Case T-272/25 is removed from the register of the General Court.


(1)  Date lodged: 9.4.2025.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5715/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-584/25: Action brought on 20 August 2025 – Khoury and Khoury v Council
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, economic sanctions, fundamental rights, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, rights of the defence








C_202505598EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5598


27.10.2025






Action brought on 20 August 2025 – Khoury and Khoury v Council


(Case T-584/25)

(C/2025/5598)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Mudalal Khoury (Moscow, Russia), Imad Khoury (Moscow) (represented by: E. Hatem, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul, in so far as the applicants are concerned, Decision (CFSP) 2025/1255 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1256;










—


order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging an infringement of the rights of the defence and of the right to adversarial proceedings.










—


The applicants submit that they were never informed nor were they heard before their inclusion on the restrictive measures list. They state that the evidence submitted by the Council comes from partisan media and Activist NGOs, and is not verifiable. The applicants claim furthermore that a copy of the file was sent to them more than one month after their inclusion on the list, with a very short deadline for submitting observations.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a lack of solid and reliable evidence.










—


The applicants state that the claims are based on newspaper articles, NGO reports and secondary sources not subject to any independent checks. No official document, company register, judicial decision or financial investigation supports the allegations.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging a failure to state reasons in the decision.










—


The applicants submit that the contested decisions merely list external sources without elaborating on the facts alleged or their legal basis, and that the sources were not assessed critically and no conclusive evidence was provided.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging disproportionate harm to the applicants’ reputation and infringement of their fundamental rights.










—


The applicants submit in this respect that their being listed causes great harm to their reputation and infringes their fundamental rights, and that the allegations that they had contributed to crimes against humanity are unfounded and unsubstantiated. According to the applicants, the measure is neither strictly necessary nor proportionate.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5598/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.119176
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Germany, North Rhine-Westphalia, State aid, control of State aid, electronic game, publishing, software








C_202504673EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4673


20.8.2025






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.119176
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/4673)








Date of adoption of the decision


24.7.2025




Aid number


SA.119176




Member State


Germany




Region


Nordrhein-Westfalen




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Förderung von digitalen Spielen und immersiven Inhalten durch das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen




Legal basis


Förderleitlinien der Film- und Medienstiftung NRW GmbH für die Förderung von digitalen Spielen und immersiven Inhalten




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Culture




Form of aid


Direct grant, Loan/ Repayable advances




Budget


Overall budget: 25 000 000  EUR
Annual budget: 5 000 000  EUR




Intensity


80,0 %




Duration


Until 31.12.2029




Economic sectors


SECTION J – PUBLISHING, BROADCASTING, AND CONTENT PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION ACTIVITIES, Publishing of video games, Other software publishing




Name and address of the granting authority







Film- und Medienstiftung NRW GmbH




Bahnhofsvorplatz 1, 50667 Köln








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/2025/4673/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-557/25 P: Appeal brought on 20 August 2025 by EO against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 11 June 2025 in Case T-368/24, EO v Parliament
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, damages, disciplinary proceedings, rights of the defence, staff regulations (EU)








C_202506155EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6155


24.11.2025






Appeal brought on 20 August 2025 by EO against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 11 June 2025 in Case T-368/24, EO v Parliament


(Case C-557/25 P)

(C/2025/6155)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: EO (represented by: L. Levi, P. Baudoux, avocates)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The Appellant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the judgment under appeal;










—


consequently, grant the Appellant the benefit of his conclusions at first instance and, therefore:






—


annul the termination decision of 15 September 2023;










—


if need be, annul the decision of 17 April 2024 rejecting his administrative complaint;










—


condemn the Defendant to compensate the Appellant for the damage suffered;










—


order the Defendant to pay all the costs.














—


order the Defendant to pay all the costs of both the appeal and of the first instance.





Pleas in law and main arguments







1.


With the first ground for appeal, the Appellant submits that the General Court erred in law when interpreting Article 3 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations.










2.


With the second ground for appeal, the Appellant contests the General Court’s findings on the manifest error of assessment. The Appellant claims that the General Court erred in law by failing to consider the plea regarding the breach of its duty to provide reasons, and by distorting the evidence.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6155/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-573/25: Action brought on 20 August 2025 – Romania v Commission
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, distillation, eligibility criteria, infringement of EU law, principle of proportionality, wine








C_202505224EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5224


6.10.2025






Action brought on 20 August 2025 – Romania v Commission


(Case T-573/25)

(C/2025/5224)
Language of the case: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Romania (represented by: E. Gane, M. Chicu and B. Ciulacu, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Decision 2025/1147 in part, in so far as it concerns the exclusion from European Union financing of expenditure in the amount of EUR 4 946 954,14 representing flat-rate financial corrections applied under the EAGF on the ground of infringement of EU law by the Romanian State in connection with payments, relating to ‘Wine – Crisis Distillation’ measures, made in the 2020 and 2021 financial years;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging inappropriate exercise by the Commission of its power to exclude sums from EU financing on the basis of Article 52 of Regulation No 1306/2013.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging failure to fulfil the obligation to state reasons laid down by the second paragraph of Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5224/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-560/25: Action brought on 20 August 2025 – European Parliament v Council of the European Union
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU industrial policy, European defence policy, case-law (EU), common security and defence policy, defence industry, industrial development, legal basis








C_202505209EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5209


6.10.2025






Action brought on 20 August 2025 – European Parliament v Council of the European Union


(Case C-560/25)

(C/2025/5209)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: F. Drexler, L. Visaggio, A. Tamás, R. Crowe and O. Denkov, agents)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

The applicant claims that the Court should:







—


annul Council Regulation 2025/1106 (1) of 27 May 2025 establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the reinforcement of the European Defence Industry Instrument;










—


maintain the effects of that Regulation until its replacement with an act adopted on the appropriate legal basis;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Applicant puts forward two pleas in law in support of its application.
First plea in law, alleging that the contested act is incorrectly based on Article 122 TFEU. The Applicant submits that in application of the relevant case-law concerning the choice of the legal basis, and in the light of its aim and content, the contested act does not satisfy the conditions for relying upon Article 122 TFEU, and it concerns instead the development of the Union’s industrial policy in the field of defence pursuant to Article 173 TFEU.
Second plea in law, alleging an infringement of the duty to state reasons. The Applicant submits that the Council has failed, in violation of Article 296 TFEU, to adequately state the reasons justifying the choice of the legal basis for the contested act. In particular, the reasoning provided by the Council is not sufficient to ascertain whether the contested act could correctly be based on Article 122 TFEU.


(1)  
            OJ L, 2025/1106, 28.5.2025.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5209/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-458/24: Order of the General Court of 20 August 2025 – APEDA and O’Connor v Commission (Action for annulment – Access to documents – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Implied refusal of access – Express decision adopted after the action was brought – No need to adjudicate – Modification of the form of order sought – Article 86(2) of the Rules of Procedure – Failure to observe the time limit for instituting proceedings – No separate document – Manifest inadmissibility – Application for a direction to be issued – Manifest lack of jurisdiction)
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Pakistan, access to EU information, designation of origin, jurisdiction, labelling, product designation, rice








C_202505583EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5583


27.10.2025






Order of the General Court of 20 August 2025 – APEDA and O’Connor v Commission


(Case T-458/24)
                (1)

(Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Implied refusal of access - Express decision adopted after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate - Modification of the form of order sought - Article 86(2) of the Rules of Procedure - Failure to observe the time limit for instituting proceedings - No separate document - Manifest inadmissibility - Application for a direction to be issued - Manifest lack of jurisdiction)
(C/2025/5583)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) (New Delhi, India), Bernard O’Connor (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Hommé and B. O’Connor, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and M. Burón Pérez, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek the annulment of the implied decision of the European Commission of 1 July 2024 by which it refused the confirmatory application for access to documents that was registered under EASE 2024/1869 and, after modification of the form of order sought by them, of Commission Decision C(2024) 8058 final of 13 November 2024, by which the Commission granted the applicants partial or full access to some of the requested documents.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the claim for annulment of the implied decision of the European Commission of 1 July 2024 rejecting the confirmatory application for access to certain documents with reference EASE 2024/1869.










2.


The action is dismissed as to the remainder, in part, as having been brought before a court which manifestly has no jurisdiction to hear it and, in part, as manifestly inadmissible.










3.


Each party shall bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2024/6942, 25.11.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5583/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1570 of 29 July 2025 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards notification of information on certified qualified electronic signature creation devices and certified qualified electronic seal creation devices (OJ L, 2025/1570, 30.7.2025)
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European standard, data protection, digital single market, electronic signature, exchange of information, information security, personal data, provision of services, technical specification, technical standard








L_202590654EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
L series













2025/90654


20.8.2025






Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1570 of 29 July 2025 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards notification of information on certified qualified electronic signature creation devices and certified qualified electronic seal creation devices

(
Official Journal of the European Union L, 2025/1570, 30 July 2025
)


On page 2, Article 2, second paragraph:
for:


                  ‘This Regulation shall apply from 19 December 2025.’,

read:


                  ‘This Regulation shall apply from 19 November 2025.’.



ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1570/corrigendum/2025-08-20/oj
ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 19 August 2025
Date: 2025-08-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202503813EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/3813


20.8.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            19 August 2025
         
(C/2025/3813)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1682 




JPY


Japanese yen


172,67 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4646 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86400 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,1580 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9409 




ISK


Iceland króna


143,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,9280 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,457 




HUF


Hungarian forint


393,70 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2448 




RON


Romanian leu


5,0579 




TRY


Turkish lira


47,7320 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7994 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6133 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1137 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,9713 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4989 




KRW


South Korean won


1 622,40 




ZAR


South African rand


20,5788 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,3866 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


18 989,62 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9339 




PHP


Philippine peso


66,760 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,972 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3563 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,9599 




INR


Indian rupee


101,7358 






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3813/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)