do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.12120 – INFRANITY / OMNES CAPITAL / PCRE JV)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, investment company, merger control, renewable energy, solar energy








C_202506229EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6229


14.11.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.12120 – INFRANITY / OMNES CAPITAL / PCRE JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/6229)

On 15 October 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 32025M12120. 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/2025/6229/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-381/24: Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – Frutaria Innovation v EUIPO – Schneider (Frutaria) (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU figurative mark Frutaria – Absolute ground for invalidity – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – No distinctive character acquired through use – Article 7(3) and Article 51(2) of Regulation No 40/94)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dried product, export, fresh fruit, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202506175EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6175


24.11.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – Frutaria Innovation v EUIPO – Schneider (Frutaria)


(Case T-381/24)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Frutaria - Absolute ground for invalidity - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) and Article 51(2) of Regulation No 40/94)
(C/2025/6175)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Frutaria Innovation SL (Zaragoza, Spain) (represented by: M. Anadón Giménez and J. Learte Álvarez, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Markus Schneider (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: F. Klopmeier and F. Breuer, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the partial annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 May 2024 (Case R 1377/2023-2), as corrected on 17 July 2024.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Frutaria Innovation SL to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2024/5330, 9.9.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6175/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-306/23: Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – Red Bull and Others v Commission (Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Abuse of dominant position – Energy drinks sector – Administrative procedure – Decision ordering an inspection – Article 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Obligation to state reasons – Sufficiently serious indicia – Suspicion of an infringement – Proportionality)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrative procedure, aerated drink, cartel, control of restrictive practices, dominant position, principle of proportionality








C_202506167EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6167


24.11.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – Red Bull and Others v Commission


(Case T-306/23)
                (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Abuse of dominant position - Energy drinks sector - Administrative procedure - Decision ordering an inspection - Article 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Obligation to state reasons - Sufficiently serious indicia - Suspicion of an infringement - Proportionality)
(C/2025/6167)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Red Bull GmbH (Fuschl am See, Austria), Red Bull France SASU (Paris, France), Red Bull Nederland BV (Soesterberg, Netherlands) (represented by: H. Wollmann, F. Urlesberger, J. Schindler, F. Dethmers and A. Visontai-Knor, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Kellerbauer, T. Franchoo, M. Jakobs and I. Naglis, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek annulment of Commission Decision C(2023) 1689 final of 8 March 2023 ordering Red Bull GmbH and all the companies directly or indirectly controlled by it, including Red Bull France and Red Bull Nederland, to submit to an inspection in accordance with Article 20(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (Case AT.40819 – WINGS), and seek the annulment of any measure ordered by the European Commission in the context of that inspection.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Red Bull GmbH, Red Bull France SASU and Red Bull Nederland BV to pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.






(1)  
            OJ C 261, 24.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6167/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.12040 – SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS / FLÄKTGROUP)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: air conditioning, economic concentration, electrical equipment, electronic equipment, fire protection, heating, information technology applications, merger control, mobile communication, thermal equipment








C_202505666EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5666


22.10.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.12040 – SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS / FLÄKTGROUP)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/5666)

On 15 October 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 32025M12040. 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/2025/5666/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Cases T-295/23 and T-1176/23: Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – WU v Eurojust (Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Administrative inquiry – Article 12a of the Staff Regulations – Psychological harassment – Request for assistance – Refusal of the request – Article 24 of the Staff Regulations – Duty to exercise due care – Liability)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: disciplinary proceedings, harassment at work, indemnification, psychological harassment, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU)








C_202506166EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6166


24.11.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – WU v Eurojust


(Cases T-295/23 and T-1176/23)
                (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Administrative inquiry - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Psychological harassment - Request for assistance - Refusal of the request - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Duty to exercise due care - Liability)
(C/2025/6166)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: WU (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (represented by: M. García Bello and M. Castro Granja, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

By his action in Case T-295/23, based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant is seeking, first, annulment of Decision 2022-04 of 15 July 2022, by which the Executive Board of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) rejected a part of his request for assistance of 7 May 2021 and, second, compensation for the harm he claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.
By his action in Case T-1176/23, based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant is seeking, first, annulment of Decision 2023-03 of 14 February 2023, by which the College of Eurojust rejected the other part of his request for assistance of 7 May 2021 and, second, compensation for the harm he claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Joins Cases T-295/23 and T-1176/23 for the purposes of the judgment;










2.


Annuls Decision 2022-04 of the Executive Board of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) of 15 July 2022 and Decision 2023-03 of the College of Eurojust of 14 February 2023, by which WU’s request for assistance of 7 May 2021 was rejected;










3.


Dismisses the actions as to the remainder;










4.


Orders Eurojust to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 252, 17.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6166/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-773/25, Finanzamt für Großbetriebe: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) made on 15 October 2025 – Finanzamt für Großbetriebe v F GmbH
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: VAT, administrative formalities, illicit trade, intra-EU trade, invoicing, tax exemption, taxpayer








C_202600181EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/181


12.1.2026






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) made on 15 October 2025 – Finanzamt für Großbetriebe v F GmbH


(Case T-773/25, Finanzamt für Großbetriebe)

(C/2026/181)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Finanzamt für Großbetriebe

Interested party: F GmbH

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 42(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010 (2) be interpreted as meaning that the first issuance of an invoice that is necessary for the application of the derogation for triangular transactions but which is issued only some years after the supply was effected triggers the legal consequences of the administrative simplification scheme ex nunc?










2.


If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, does the ex nunc effectiveness of the first issuance of such an invoice depend on the person issuing the invoice having ensured taxation in accordance with the general conditions in the Member State of destination for the period of time preceding the issuance of that invoice?










3.


If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, in what form must the intermediary provide proof that the necessary invoice issued for the first time was in fact received by the end customer?






(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

(2)  Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010 amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the rules on invoicing (OJ 2010 L 189, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/181/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 14 October 2025
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202505269EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5269


15.10.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            14 October 2025
         
(C/2025/5269)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1553 




JPY


Japanese yen


175,72 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4684 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87120 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,0380 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9296 




ISK


Iceland króna


141,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,7725 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,324 




HUF


Hungarian forint


393,00 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2625 




RON


Romanian leu


5,0903 




TRY


Turkish lira


48,3242 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7906 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6249 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9823 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,0309 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5037 




KRW


South Korean won


1 657,52 




ZAR


South African rand


20,1751 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2488 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


19 212,35 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8869 




PHP


Philippine peso


67,288 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,905 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3536 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4926 




INR


Indian rupee


102,5828 






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5269/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-223/23: Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – VZ v Parliament (Law governing the institutions – Members of the European Parliament – Psychological harassment – Decisions of the President of the Parliament finding that several accredited parliamentary assistants had been subjected to psychological harassment, and ordering the forfeiture of a Member’s right to the daily subsistence allowance and that the Member be suspended from taking part in the Parliament’s activities for thirty days – Procedural deadlines – Rights of the defence – Presumption of innocence)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, administrative sanction, allowances and expenses, disciplinary proceedings, harassment at work, presumption of innocence, psychological harassment, rights of the defence, servant (EU)








C_202506163EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6163


24.11.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – VZ v Parliament


(Case T-223/23)
                (1)

(Law governing the institutions - Members of the European Parliament - Psychological harassment - Decisions of the President of the Parliament finding that several accredited parliamentary assistants had been subjected to psychological harassment, and ordering the forfeiture of a Member’s right to the daily subsistence allowance and that the Member be suspended from taking part in the Parliament’s activities for thirty days - Procedural deadlines - Rights of the defence - Presumption of innocence)
(C/2025/6163)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: VZ (represented by: J.-M. Benítez de Lugo Guillen and G. Gil Robles Mathieu de Vienne, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: I. Lázaro Betancor, D. Boytha and T. Lukácsi, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment (i) of the decision of the European Parliament of 16 January 2023 by which it found, with regard to each of the three parliamentary assistants accredited to the applicant, the existence of harassment on her part, (ii) of the Parliament’s decision of 16 January 2023 imposing on her a penalty consisting in the forfeiture of entitlement to the daily subsistence allowance for a total period of 30 days and in the suspension of her participation in the Parliament’s activities for a total period of 30 days, and (iii) of any other measure prior to, related to, or following that penalty.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders VZ to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 223, 26.6.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6163/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-703/25: Action brought on 15 October 2025 – Sabormex v EUIPO – Tierra Brands España (TIERRA GARAT MÉXICO ES CAFÉ Y CHOCOLATE)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, catering industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202600114EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/114


5.1.2026






Action brought on 15 October 2025 – Sabormex v EUIPO – Tierra Brands España (TIERRA GARAT MÉXICO ES CAFÉ Y CHOCOLATE)


(Case T-703/25)

(C/2026/114)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Sabormex SAPI de CV (Mexico City, Mexico) (represented by: J.F. Gallego Jiménez, E. Sanz Valls, P. Bauzá Martínez and Y. Hernández Viñes, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tierra Brands España, SL (Madrid, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark TIERRA GARAT MÉXICO ES CAFÉ Y CHOCOLATE – Application No 18 906 730
         

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 August 2025 in Case R 292/2025-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


consequently, annul the decision on the opposition brought against the contested mark, ordering the possible peaceful coexistence of the opposing marks, and allow registration of the contested mark;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Error in the assessment of the proof of use submitted by the defendant before the Board of Appeal in finding the effective use of the earlier mark during the relevant period to be sufficiently proven and failure to take account of the arguments and facts set out by the appellant before the Board of Appeal;










—


Error in the overall assessment of the earlier mark and the contested mark, by dividing up and dismembering each mark, eliminating the additional elements of the contested mark and failing to take account of the obvious overall differences;










—


Error in the assessment of the degree of distinctiveness of the common element ‘TIERRA’ in relation to the services in Class 43.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/114/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Appointment of a Hearing Officer
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Human Resources and Security, European Commission
Subjects: European official, administrative procedure, appointment of members








C_202505535EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5535


15.10.2025






Appointment of a Hearing Officer
(C/2025/5535)

Following selection procedure COM/2025/459, the Commission decided to appoint Mr Gustavo Enrique LUENGO HERNANDEZ DE MADRID to the post of Hearing Officer in trade proceedings with effect from 1.11.2025, in accordance with Article 3 of Decision (EU) 2019/339 of the President of the European Commission of 21 February 2019 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain trade proceedings (1).


(1)  
            OJ L 60, 28.2.2019, p. 20.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5535/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-109/25: Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – Bulkhead v EUIPO – Ubisoft Entertainment (WARDOGS) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark WARDOGS – Earlier EU word mark WATCH DOGS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2025-10-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, online game, optical industry, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_202506179EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6179


24.11.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2025 – Bulkhead v EUIPO – Ubisoft Entertainment (WARDOGS)


(Case T-109/25)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark WARDOGS - Earlier EU word mark WATCH DOGS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2025/6179)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Bulkhead Ltd (Derby, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Selmi, Barrister-at-Law)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Ubisoft Entertainment (Carentoir, France)

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 December 2024 (Case R 1314/2024-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Bulkhead Ltd and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) each to bear their own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2025/1780, 31.3.2025.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6179/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)