do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice amending the notice of open competition – EPSO/AD/425/25 – Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Project management in the building sector, 2. Architecture and project management, 3. Electrical engineering and project management, 4. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) engineering and project management (OJ C, C/2025/4967, 16.9.2025)
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: administrator, architecture, building industry, competition (EU), electrotechnology, job vacancy, recruitment, technology








C_202505870EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5870


3.11.2025






Notice amending the notice of open competition – EPSO/AD/425/25 – Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Project management in the building sector, 2. Architecture and project management, 3. Electrical engineering and project management, 4. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) engineering and project management


(Official Journal of the European Union C, C/2025/4967, 16 September 2025)


(C/2025/5870)


          
      
Following the completion of the tendering process and the signature of a framework contract with the new provider for the online delivery of tests in open competitions, EPSO has been working to integrate the new provider into its operational processes and IT systems. In this context, EPSO reviewed the notice of the first competition, EPSO/AD/425/25, to be conducted with the new provider. This review determined that a minor amendment to the testing procedures set out in Annex I, General rules, is required. EPSO will inform candidates of all the testing modalities in the instructions issued alongside the invitations to testing.
For the reasons outlined above, the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/425/25 is amended as follows:
On page 19, Annex I, General Rules, Section 7.1 ‘Technical and organisational issues’, point (3) is replaced by the following:






‘(3)



If the problem occurs during testing, a candidate must do both of the following:






(a)


report the issue immediately strictly following instructions outlined in the letter(s) inviting candidates to test(s),

and











(b)


within 3 calendar days, counting from (and including) the day following the day on which a candidate took the test, contact EPSO via their candidate account, giving a detailed description of the problem. The candidate should also attach the proof of attempt(s) to resolve the issue. This documentary proof is necessary to enable EPSO to make inquiries into the situation. The invitation letters to tests may specify further requirements and instructions related to reporting of issues encountered during testing.
The obligation to inform EPSO applies in all cases, even where the test delivery provider followed up on the candidate’s complaint.’
                              










ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5870/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-759/25: Action brought on 3 November 2025 – Consejo Regulador Aceite de Jaén v EUIPO – Agrícola La Loma (VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLÓGICOS)
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fruit, olive oil, processed food product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable








C_202600179EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/179


12.1.2026






Action brought on 3 November 2025 – Consejo Regulador ‘Aceite de Jaén’ v EUIPO – Agrícola La Loma


(VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLÓGICOS)


(Case T-759/25)

(C/2026/179)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Consejo Regulador de la Indicación Geográfica Protegida ‘Aceite de Jaén’ (Mengíbar, Spain) (represented by: F. Muñoz Calvo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Agrícola La Loma S. Coop. Andaluza (Torreblascopedro, Spain)

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: Figurative mark VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLÓGICOS – European Union trade mark No 18 326 674
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 September 2025 in Case R 1119/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 7(1)(f), (g) and (j) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/179/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.12185 – CPP INVESTMENTS / STONE POINT / ONEDIGITAL)
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, insurance, investment company, merger control, personnel administration








C_202506411EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6411


26.11.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.12185 – CPP INVESTMENTS / STONE POINT / ONEDIGITAL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/6411)

On 3 November 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 32025M12185. 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/2025/6411/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 31 October 2025
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202505282EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5282


3.11.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            31 October 2025
         
(C/2025/5282)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1554 




JPY


Japanese yen


178,14 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4677 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88160 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,9250 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9287 




ISK


Iceland króna


144,80 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,6485 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,327 




HUF


Hungarian forint


388,10 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2560 




RON


Romanian leu


5,0858 




TRY


Turkish lira


48,5832 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7672 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6207 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9787 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,0212 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5039 




KRW


South Korean won


1 650,07 




ZAR


South African rand


20,0452 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2220 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


19 251,16 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8388 




PHP


Philippine peso


67,835 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,348 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2171 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4286 




INR


Indian rupee


102,5070 






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5282/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Corrigendum to the Case T-483/25 (OJ C, C/2025/5083, 29.9.2025)
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, data-processing law, disclosure of information, legislative procedure, right to information








C_202590096EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/90096


3.11.2025






Corrigendum to the Case T-483/25

(
Official Journal of the European Union C, C/2025/5083, 29 September 2025
)


The Case T-483/25, Wölken v Commission, should read as follows:

                  ‘
                  



Action brought on 19 July 2025 – Wölken v Commission


(Case T-483/25)

(C/2025/5083)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Tiemo Wölken (Osnabrück, Germany) (represented by: C. Zatschler, Senior Counsel, and M. Sánchez Rydelski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the implicit decisions of the defendant of 30 May 2025 and 4 July 2025, rejecting his requests for access to several documents relating to legislative procedures, in particular concerning a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on standard essential patents and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, (1) pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, (2) as deemed rejected by the defendant;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by him in addition to its own costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on one pleas in law.
There has been a breach of the obligation to state reasons under Article 296 TFEU.
The defendant did not respond within the applicable time-limit to two confirmatory applications by the applicant for access to documents, which, pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001, resulted in the applications being deemed to have been rejected. Such a presumed refusal of access meant, by definition, that there was a complete lack of justification and therefore did not fulfil the obligation of the EU institutions to state reasons under Article 296 TFEU.



                  ’.


(1)  Proposal of 27 April 2023 (COM(2023) 232 final).

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5083/corrigendum/2025-11-03/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.118760
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: France, State aid, animal production, control of State aid, crop production, hunting, service








C_202505878EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5878


3.11.2025






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.118760
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/5878)








Date of adoption of the decision


18.8.2025




Aid number


SA.118760




Member State


France




Region


France




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Aide à la relance des exploitations agricoles (AREA)




Legal basis


Articles D.354-1 à D.354-15 du code rural et de la pêche maritimeArrêté du 5 août 2022 fixant le montant et certaines modalités de mise en œuvre des aides pour les exploitations agricoles en difficulté




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Agriculture; Forestry; Rural areas, Aid for rescuing and restructuring undertakings in difficulty, Restructuring undertakings in difficulty




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 7 000 000  EUR
Annual budget: 7 000 000  EUR




Intensity


 




Duration


Until 31.12.2025




Economic sectors


Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities




Name and address of the granting authority







Ministère de l’Agriculture et de la Souveraineté alimentaire




3 rue Barbet de Jouy - 75007 PARIS








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/2025/5878/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.12160 – LA CAISSE / MACQUARIE / RHP PARTNERS-MANAGER GP / JV)
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Canada, United States, economic concentration, investment company, joint venture, merger control, property leasing, property market, real property, single-family housing








C_202506075EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6075


10.11.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.12160 – LA CAISSE / MACQUARIE / RHP PARTNERS-MANAGER GP / JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/6075)

On 3 November 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 32025M12160. 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/2025/6075/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-765/25: Action brought on 3 November 2025 – WR v Commission
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: allowances and expenses, dependant, family benefit, indemnification, medical examination, principle of legal certainty, servant (EU)








C_202506656EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6656


22.12.2025






Action brought on 3 November 2025 – WR v Commission


(Case T-765/25)

(C/2025/6656)
Language of the case: French

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 21 November 2024 rejecting the request to receive double dependent child allowance;










—


annul, in so far as is necessary, the decision of 24 July 2025 rejecting the complaint;










—


order the defendant to pay to the applicant ten thousand euros as compensation for material and non-material damage resulting from the error committed by the defendant in dealing with the request and the pre-litigation procedure, and ten thousand euros for the loss of opportunity to gather the evidence of the heavy expenditure connected to the state of the applicant’s son;










—


order the defendant 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 an error of law and infringement of Article 67(3) of the Staff Regulations, and failure to carry out a precise and detailed assessment of the applicant’s son.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment, insufficient and contradictory reasons, breach of the principles of legal certainty and of acquired rights, abuse of rights and breach of the duty to have regard for the welfare of officials, by requiring new tests.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging an unreasonable delay and the loss of opportunity to gather all the necessary documents to establish the existence of heavy expenditure.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6656/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-767/25: Action brought on 3 November 2025 – NS v Commission
Date: 2025-11-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: allowances and expenses, dependant, family benefit, legality, principle of legal certainty, rights of the defence, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU)








C_202506657EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6657


22.12.2025






Action brought on 3 November 2025 – NS v Commission


(Case T-767/25)

(C/2025/6657)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: NS (represented by: S. Pappas and A. Pappas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (‘PMO’) of 25 November 2024 establishing the recovery of the unduly paid double dependent child allowance from December 2019 to 15 May 2023 and the decision of the Appointing Authority of 23 July 2025, by which the complaint of 25 February 2025 of the applicant against the decision of the PMO of 25 November 2024 was explicitly rejected;










—


order that the defendant pay all the costs.





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 the infringement of the decision of the Appointing Authority of 22 January 2024, and of the principles of legality, legal certainty and legitimate expectations.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging the infringement of the applicant’s right to be heard.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging the inapplicability of Article 85 of the Staff Regulations.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging the infringement of the pre-litigation procedure.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging the inadmissible consideration of the elements obtained through the Mediation Service.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6657/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)