do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-629/25: Action brought on 15 September 2025 – WO Trading v Parliament and Council
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belarus, Russia, agricultural product, fertiliser, import (EU), import levy, originating product, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_202505723EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5723


3.11.2025






Action brought on 15 September 2025 – WO Trading v Parliament and Council


(Case T-629/25)

(C/2025/5723)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: SIA WO Trading (Kuldīga, Latvia) (represented by: D. Rovetta, V. Villante and M. Moretto, lawyers)

Defendants: European Parliament, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul Regulation (EU) 2025/1227 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2025 on the modification of customs duties applicable to imports of certain goods originating in or exported from the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, insofar as it concerns the applicant;










—


Order the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament to bear the costs of the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging misapplication of article 207 TFEU; wrong choice of legal basis under the Treaties of the EU; breach of the principle of legal certainty.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligations to state reasons under Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality; breach of Article 5(4) Treaty of the European Union.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of the fundamental right to be heard –Article 41(a), 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamentals Rights; breach of Article 215 TFEU; breach of Article 3(1) World Trade Organization Agreement on Safeguards; breach of Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2015/478; breach of the principle of legal certainty.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging misapplication of Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT); breach of Articles I & II of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT).






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5723/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006)
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: aviation fuel, chemical compound, chemical product, health control, health risk, lead, market approval, marketing standard








C_202504929EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4929


15.9.2025






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)


(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006
                (1)
)


(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/4929)


Decision granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2025) 5923


8 September 2025


tetraethyl lead (EC No 201-075-4; CAS No 78-00-2)


Shell Nederland Raffinaderij B.V., Vondelingenweg 601, Postbus 3000, 3190 GA Rotterdam, the Netherlands


REACH/25/37/0


In the formulation of aviation fuel


30 April 2032


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.






(1)  
            OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu)



ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4929/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-680/25, Mercedes Benz: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) made on 15 September 2025 – Mercedes-Benz AG v Ministerul Finanțelor – Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor and Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București – Administrația Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenți
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, free service, interpretation of the law, provision of services, subcontracting, supplier








C_202506308EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6308


1.12.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) made on 15 September 2025 – Mercedes-Benz AG v Ministerul Finanțelor – Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor and Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București – Administrația Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenți


(Case T-680/25, Mercedes Benz)

(C/2025/6308)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Mercedes-Benz AG

Defendants: Ministerul Finanțelor – Direcția Generală de Soluționare a Contestațiilor, Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București – Administrația Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Nerezidenți

Questions referred







1.


Must [Council] Directive 2006/112[/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax] (1) in general, but in particular Article 26 thereof, be interpreted, in a specific context such as that in the main proceedings, as meaning that the making available free of charge of pieces of equipment/moulds by their owner to a particular supplier, which in turn makes them available to one or more sub-suppliers (producers), which produce parts/components, for the benefit the owner of the moulds, which they sell to the supplier, which in turn resells them to the owner of the moulds, may be regarded as a supply of services for consideration?










2.


Does Directive [2006/112] in general, but in particular Article 26 thereof, preclude a judicial interpretation of national law according to which the making available free of charge of the pieces of equipment/moulds to the producer/supplier is not treated as a supply for consideration only if the producer/supplier of the parts/components, for which the pieces of equipment/moulds were used, supplies them directly to the owner of the moulds, that is to say, if this presupposes the existence of a direct invoicing relationship between the producer of the parts/components and the owner of the moulds?






(1)  
            OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6308/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Notice of request concerning the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU – Extension of the period for the adoption of implementing acts
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: Estonia, award of contract, postal service, provision of services








C_202505047EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5047


15.9.2025






Notice of request concerning the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU
Extension of the period for the adoption of implementing acts
(C/2025/5047)

On 1 April 2025, the Commission received a request pursuant to Article 35 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (1).
This request, made by the Republic of Estonia, concerns activities relating to the provision of postal services and other services in Estonia. The relevant notice was published in OJ C 2025/2295 of 15 April 2025. The initial deadline was 8 September 2025.
Pursuant to the fourth subparagraph of paragraph 1 to Annex IV of Directive 2014/25/EU, the deadline may be extended by the Commission with the agreement of those having made the request for exemption concerned. Given that the Commission needs to obtain and examine further information, and with the agreement of the Republic of Estonia, the period available to the Commission for deciding on this request is hereby extended by 16 working days.
The final deadline therefore expires on 30 September 2025.


(1)  Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement procedures by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5047/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-647/24: Order of the General Court of 15 September 2025 – Lico Cosmetics v EUIPO – Cosmética Natural de Licopeno (LICO) (European Union trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Withdrawal of the opposition – No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer network, cosmetic product, electronic commerce, provision of services, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_202505713EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5713


3.11.2025






Order of the General Court of 15 September 2025 – Lico Cosmetics v EUIPO – Cosmética Natural de Licopeno (LICO)


(Case T-647/24)
                (1)

(European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)
(C/2025/5713)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Lico Cosmetics, SL (Seville, Spain) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Cosmética Natural de Licopeno, SL (Badajoz, Spain) (represented by: C. Casas Feu and M. González Rodríguez, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 10 October 2024 (Case R 833/2024-4).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


Lico Cosmetics, SL, and Cosmética Natural de Licopeno, SL, shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2025/744, 10.2.2025.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5713/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-610/25 P: Appeal brought on 15 September 2025 by Abacus Research AG against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 16 July 2025 in Case T-553/24, Abacus Research v EUIPO – American Bar Association (Aba)
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, information security, information technology applications, registered trade mark, service, software, trade-mark law








C_202600623EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/623


9.2.2026






Appeal brought on 15 September 2025 by Abacus Research AG against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 16 July 2025 in Case T-553/24, Abacus Research v EUIPO – American Bar Association (Aba)


(Case C-610/25 P)

(C/2026/623)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Abacus Research AG (represented by: T. Schmitz, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, American Bar Association
By order of 15 December 2025, the Court (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) refused the request that the appeal be allowed to proceed and ordered Abacus Research AG to bear its own costs.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/623/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-606/25, CGIL del Trentino: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 15 September 2025 – S. A., Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL) del Trentino v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Avvocatura dello Stato
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: access to a profession, age discrimination, equal treatment, lawyer








C_202506158EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6158


24.11.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 15 September 2025 – S. A., Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL) del Trentino v Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Avvocatura dello Stato


(Case C-606/25, CGIL del Trentino)

(C/2025/6158)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: S. A., Confederazione Generale Italiana del Lavoro (CGIL) del Trentino

Respondents: Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Avvocatura dello Stato

Question referred

Must Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78, establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as the Italian legislation set out in Article 1 of Presidential Decree No 141 of 2000, as amended by Presidential Decree No 161 of 2011, which is at issue here; that is to say, is the eligibility criterion setting an age limit of thirty-five for taking part in a competition for a position as a procuratore dello Stato – laid down in the aforementioned legislation – objectively justified by legitimate aims, and are the means used to achieve those aims appropriate and necessary?


(1)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6158/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Notice for the attention of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1895, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1894 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, freezing of assets, international sanctions, legal person, natural person, territorial dispute, territorial law








C_202505102EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5102


15.9.2025






Notice for the attention of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1895, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1894 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine
(C/2025/5102)

The following information is brought to the attention of the natural or legal persons, entities or bodies that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1895 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (3) as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1894 (4) concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.
Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 requires that those natural or legal persons, entities or bodies must report, before 1 September 2022 or within 6 weeks from the date of listing in Annex I, whichever is latest, funds or economic resources within the jurisdiction of a Member State belonging to, owned, held or controlled by them, to the competent authority of the Member State where those funds or economic resources are located. They must cooperate with the national competent authority in any verification of such information. Failure to comply with these obligations will be considered as circumvention of the measures on the freezing of funds and of economic resources.
The information to be reported must be sent to the competent authority of the relevant Member State, via its website as indicated in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 269/2014.


(1)  
            OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 16.

(2)  
            OJ L, 2025/1895, 15.9.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2025/1895/oj.

(3)  
            OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 6.

(4)  
            OJ L, 2025/1894, 15.9.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1894/oj.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5102/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-630/25: Action brought on 15 September 2025 – Uralchem v Parliament and Council
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belarus, Russia, agricultural product, fertiliser, import (EU), import levy, originating product, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_202505724EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5724


3.11.2025






Action brought on 15 September 2025 – Uralchem v Parliament and Council


(Case T-630/25)

(C/2025/5724)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: United Chemical Company Uralchem AO (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: M. Campa, M. Pirovano and A. Ronco, lawyers)

Defendants: European Parliament, Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul Regulation (EU) 2025/1227 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2025 on the modification of customs duties applicable to imports of certain goods originating in or exported from the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, insofar as it concerns the applicant;










—


Order the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament to bear the costs of the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging misapplication of Article 207 TFEU; wrong choice of legal basis under the treaties of the EU; breach of the principle of legal certainty;










2.


Second plea in law, alleging misapplication of Article XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994; breach of Articles I & II of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994;










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligations to state reasons of Article 296 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging breach of the fundamental right to be heard – Article 41(a), 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; breach of Article 215 TFEU; breach of Article 3(1) WTO Agreement on Safeguards; breach of Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2015/478; breach of the principle of legal certainty;










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of proportionality – breach of Article 5(4) TEU.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5724/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-631/25: Action brought on 15 September 2025 – Salumanus v EUIPO – Heyoptics (lightoptics)
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, broadcasting, business management, consultancy, electrical equipment, registered trade mark, software, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_202505859EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5859


10.11.2025






Action brought on 15 September 2025 – Salumanus v EUIPO – Heyoptics (lightoptics)


(Case T-631/25)

(C/2025/5859)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Salumanus sp. z o.o. (Kraków, Poland) (represented by: K. Stolarski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Heyoptics Co. Ltd (Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong, China)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark lightoptics – European Union trade mark No 18 591 243
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 July 2025 in Case R 2242/2024-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


alter the contested decision;










—


invalidate the trade mark at issue;










—


in the alternative, annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5859/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 12 September 2025
Date: 2025-09-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202504494EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4494


15.9.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            12 September 2025
         
(C/2025/4494)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1718 




JPY


Japanese yen


173,33 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4644 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86530 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,9485 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9347 




ISK


Iceland króna


143,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,5845 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,318 




HUF


Hungarian forint


391,13 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2575 




RON


Romanian leu


5,0695 




TRY


Turkish lira


48,4777 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7646 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6227 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1198 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,9702 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5042 




KRW


South Korean won


1 630,98 




ZAR


South African rand


20,3726 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,3461 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


19 262,58 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9274 




PHP


Philippine peso


66,943 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,199 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3260 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,6643 




INR


Indian rupee


103,4388 






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4494/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)