do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Annual report on EU agencies for the 2024 financial year
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU office or agency, activity report, administration of the Institutions, auditing, budgetary control, financial control








C_202505734EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5734


30.10.2025






Annual report on EU agencies for the 2024 financial year
(C/2025/5734)

The European Court of Auditors will publish its annual report on EU agencies for the 2024 financial year, together with their replies, on 30 October 2025.
The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website:

https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/publications/SAR-AGENCIES-2024



ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5734/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.12140 – BC PARTNERS / BIOGARAN) – Candidate case for simplified procedure
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: cosmetic product, dietary product, economic concentration, food supplement, generic drug, investment company, marketing, merger control, sale








C_202505795EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5795


30.10.2025






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.12140 – BC PARTNERS / BIOGARAN)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/5795)


1.   
On 20 October 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:






—


BC Partners Management XI Limited (‘BC Partners’, UK), controlled by BC Partners Holdings Limited (UK),










—


Biogaran SAS (‘Biogaran’, France), controlled by Les Laboratoires Servier SAS (France).




BC Partners will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Biogaran.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


BC Partners is an international asset management firm,










—


Biogaran conducts a business consisting of the promotion, distribution, marketing and sale of generic medicines, biosimilar medicines, as well as ranges of medicines for everyday ailments, dietary supplements and cosmetics.






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.12140 – BC PARTNERS / BIOGARAN
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/2025/5795/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-558/24, Corendon Airlines (Postponement of a flight announced in advance): Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Landshut – Germany) – Corendon Airlines Turistik Hava Tasimacilik AS v Myflyright GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Article 6 – Concept of delay of a flight – Postponement of a flight announced in advance by the air carrier with confirmation of the new departure and arrival times – Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7(1) – Right to compensation for passengers in the event of delays of three hours or more in the arrival of the flight – Concept of scheduled time of arrival – Determination of the length of the delay)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carrier, civil aviation, indemnification, passenger rights, traveller








C_202506599EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6599


22.12.2025






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Landshut – Germany) – Corendon Airlines Turistik Hava Tasimacilik AS v Myflyright GmbH


(Case C-558/24,
                (1)
Corendon Airlines (Postponement of a flight announced in advance))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Article 6 - Concept of ‘delay of a flight’ - Postponement of a flight announced in advance by the air carrier with confirmation of the new departure and arrival times - Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7(1) - Right to compensation for passengers in the event of delays of three hours or more in the arrival of the flight - Concept of ‘scheduled time of arrival’ - Determination of the length of the delay)
(C/2025/6599)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Landshut

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Corendon Airlines Turistik Hava Tasimacilik AS

Respondent: Myflyright GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91,
must be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of postponement of the departure and arrival times of a flight, announced in advance by an air carrier and accompanied by the issue of a new booking confirmation to the passengers concerned, the duration of the delay in arrival suffered by those passengers must be determined on the basis of the originally scheduled arrival time.


(1)  OJ C, C/2024/6638.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6599/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-146/24 P: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 – Fugro v Council (Appeal – Taxation – Combating of tax avoidance – Directive (EU) 2022/2523 – Global minimum level of taxation for multinational enterprise groups and large-scale domestic groups in the Union – Article 17 – International shipping income exclusion – Challenge to the scope of that exclusion – Admissibility – Article 263, fourth paragraph, TFEU – Locus standi – Lack of individual concern)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: fight against crime, group of companies, international transport, international waterway, maritime shipping, multinational enterprise, tax avoidance, tax harmonisation, tax law








C_202506591EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6591


22.12.2025






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 – Fugro v Council


(Case C-146/24 P)
                (1)

(Appeal - Taxation - Combating of tax avoidance - Directive (EU) 2022/2523 - Global minimum level of taxation for multinational enterprise groups and large-scale domestic groups in the Union - Article 17 - International shipping income exclusion - Challenge to the scope of that exclusion - Admissibility - Article 263, fourth paragraph, TFEU - 
Locus standi
 - Lack of individual concern)
(C/2025/6591)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Fugro NV (represented by: T.C. Gerverdinck, advocaat)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. d’Ursel, K. Pavlaki and G. Rugge, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the other party: European Commission (represented by: A. Armenia, L. Nicolae and W. Roels, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Fugro NV, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C, C/2024/2737.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6591/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.107691
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Crete, Greece, State aid, control of State aid, road building








C_202505772EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5772


30.10.2025






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.107691
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/5772)








Date of adoption of the decision


18.7.2025




Aid number


SA.107691




Member State


Greece




Region


KRITI




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


RRF: Northern Road Axis of Crete (BOAK) – Kissamos-Chania and Chania-Hersonissos sections




Legal basis


Concession Agreement Northern Road Axis of Crete (BOAK) – Kissamos-Chania and Chania-Hersonissos sections




Type of measure


Ad Hoc Case


SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLE - CONCESSIONAIRE “GEK TERNA S.A.”




Objective


Regional development (including territorial cooperation), Sectorial development




Form of aid


Direct grant, Other




Budget


Overall budget: 792 000 000  EUR
Annual budget: 0 EUR




Intensity


 




Duration


 




Economic sectors


Construction of roads and motorways




Name and address of the granting authority







GENERAL SECRETARIAT OF INFRASTRUCTURE




, ANASTASEOS STR, PAPAGOS, ATHENS








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/2025/5772/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.12050 – KBC / 365.BANK)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Slovakia, bank, banking, economic concentration, insurance company, merger control








C_202506381EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6381


25.11.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.12050 – KBC / 365.BANK)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/6381)

On 30 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 32025M12050. 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/2025/6381/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-749/25: Action brought on 30 October 2025 – FLA Europe and Cortina v EUIPO – Skechers USA (S)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202506652EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6652


22.12.2025






Action brought on 30 October 2025 – FLA Europe and Cortina v EUIPO – Skechers USA (S)


(Case T-749/25)

(C/2025/6652)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicants: FLA Europe (Oudenaarde, Belgium), Cortina (Oudenaarde) (represented by: A. Naeyaert, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Skechers USA, Inc. II (Manhattan Beach, California, United States)

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 S – European Union trade mark No 17 582 321
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 September 2025 in Case R 124/2024-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision insofar as it rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity for footwear;










—


alter the contested decision and declare the contested mark invalid for footwear;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6652/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-398/24, Pome: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus – Estonia) – A v B (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters – Jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – Article 25(1) – Agreement conferring jurisdiction – Agreement null and void as to its substantive validity under the law of the Member State of the court seised of the case – Concept)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction








C_202506595EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6595


22.12.2025






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Riigikohus – Estonia) – A v B


(Case C-398/24,
                (1)
Pome
                (2)
)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters - Jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 25(1) - Agreement conferring jurisdiction - Agreement null and void as to its substantive validity under the law of the Member State of the court seised of the case - Concept)
(C/2025/6595)
Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Riigikohus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant: A

Defendant and respondent: B

Operative part of the judgment

Article 25(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
must be interpreted as meaning that a condition, imposed by the national law of the Member State whose court has been designated by the parties to an agreement as having jurisdiction, according to which an agreement conferring jurisdiction entered into by natural persons is valid only if the dispute at issue is connected with the economic or professional activity of those parties, does not amount to a ground for the agreement being ‘null and void as to its substantive validity’, within the meaning of that provision.


(1)  OJ C, C/2024/4848.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6595/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 29 October 2025
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202505280EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5280


30.10.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            29 October 2025
         
(C/2025/5280)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1636 




JPY


Japanese yen


177,07 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4684 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88070 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,8960 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9278 




ISK


Iceland króna


143,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,6385 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,338 




HUF


Hungarian forint


388,23 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2418 




RON


Romanian leu


5,0841 




TRY


Turkish lira


48,8076 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7631 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6207 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,0422 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,0119 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5062 




KRW


South Korean won


1 655,74 




ZAR


South African rand


19,9043 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2609 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


19 272,36 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8737 




PHP


Philippine peso


68,316 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,578 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2220 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4634 




INR


Indian rupee


102,6660 






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5280/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-748/25: Action brought on 30 October 2025 – FLA Europe and Cortina v EUIPO – Skechers USA (S)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202506651EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6651


22.12.2025






Action brought on 30 October 2025 – FLA Europe and Cortina v EUIPO – Skechers USA (S)


(Case T-748/25)

(C/2025/6651)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicants: FLA Europe (Oudenaarde, Belgium), Cortina (Oudenaarde) (represented by: A. Naeyaert, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Skechers USA, Inc. II (Manhattan Beach, California, United States)

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 S – European Union trade mark No 3 867 579
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 September 2025 in Case R 125/2024-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


alter the contested decision and declare the contested mark invalid;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6651/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-500/24, Grupo Massimo Dutti: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo – Spain) – Grupo Massimo Dutti SA v Administracíon General del Estado (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs union – Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 – Community Customs Code – Article 29 – Value of goods for customs purposes – Determination – Goods sold for export to the customs territory of the European Union – Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 – Article 147 – Successive sales)
Date: 2025-10-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: customs territory (EU), customs union, customs valuation, customs warehouse, export, free circulation, goods, import (EU), sale








C_202506597EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6597


22.12.2025






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 October 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo – Spain) – Grupo Massimo Dutti SA v Administracíon General del Estado


(Case C-500/24,
                (1)
Grupo Massimo Dutti)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Community Customs Code - Article 29 - Value of goods for customs purposes - Determination - Goods sold for export to the customs territory of the European Union - Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 - Article 147 - Successive sales)
(C/2025/6597)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Grupo Massimo Dutti SA

Respondent: Administracíon General del Estado

Operative part of the judgment

Article 29 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, and Article 147 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1762/95 of 19 July 1995,
must be interpreted as meaning that where goods were the subject of two sales prior to their introduction into the customs territory of the European Union in order either to be placed under the customs warehousing procedure in that territory or to be released for free circulation, the first sale cannot be considered to have taken place for the export of those goods to the customs territory of the European Union if, at the time of that first sale, it was established only that those goods were intended to be introduced into that territory, and the place where those goods were ultimately to be marketed had not yet been determined.


(1)  OJ C, C/2024/6906.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6597/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)