(AGENPARL) – gio 29 giugno 2023 Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
Contact us
@ENDesk
Week XXVII – 3rd to 7th July
Jacques René
Tuesday 4th July
Zammit
Press Officer
Monica Pizzo
Assistant
EN Desk Email
Follow
Judgment in Case C-252/21 Meta Platforms and others (User conditions for a
social network)
09:00
(Approximation of Laws)
Meta Platforms is the owner of the Facebook online social network. In order to use this
social network, users must accept Facebook’s general terms and conditions when they
register, which refer to the company’s policies on the use of data and cookies. Under
@EUCourtPress
these policies, in addition to the data that users provide directly when they register,
on Twitter
Meta Platforms also collects data from other online services provided by the Facebook
group, such as Instagram and WhatsApp.
Download our
Meta Platforms links this data to the Facebook account of the users concerned and
uses it in particular for advertising purposes. The business model of this social
network is based on financing through online advertising, which is tailored to its
individual users. Such advertising is technically made possible by the automated
compilation of detailed profiles of users of the network and online services offered at
Facebook group level.
All times are 9:30
By decision of 6 February 2019, the Bundeskartellamt (Federal Competition Authority,
unless otherwise
Germany) prohibited Meta Platforms, on the one hand, from making the use of the
stated.
Facebook social network by private users resident in Germany subject to the
Don’t forget to
check the diary
on our website
for details of
other cases.
processing of their personal data in the general terms and conditions in force at the
time and, on the other hand, from processing such data without their consent.
In addition, the Federal Competition Authority required the company to amend its
General Terms and Conditions to make it clear that the data in question would not be
collected, linked to Facebook user accounts or used without the consent of the users
concerned. Finally, the authority emphasised that such consent was not valid when it
constituted a condition for using the social network. It based its decision on the fact
that the processing of the data in question, which did not comply with the GDPR,
Communications Directorate
Press and Information unit
curia.europa.eu
Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
constituted an abuse of Meta Platforms’ dominant position on the online social
networking market.
Meta Platforms appealed against this decision to the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf
(Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf, Germany). The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court
referred questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling because it had doubts as to
whether the competition authorities could monitor the compliance of personal data
processing with the requirements set out in the RGPD and as to the interpretation and
application of certain provisions of that regulation.
Background Documents C-252/21
There will be a press release in this case.
Wednesday 5th July
General Court
Judgment in Case T-115/20 Puigdemont i Casamajó and Comín i Oliveres v
Parliament and in Case T-272/21 Puigdemont i Casamajó and Others v
Parliament
(Law governing the institutions)
The three applicants stood as candidates in the elections to the European Parliament
held in Spain on 26 May 2019. On 13 June 2019 the Junta Electoral Central (Central
Electoral Commission, Spain) adopted the decision proclaiming the candidates elected
to Parliament in those elections, which included the first and second applicants. On 17
June 2019 the Central Electoral Commission notified Parliament of the list of
candidates elected in Spain, which did not include the names of the first and second
applicants.
On 20 June 2019, it notified Parliament of a decision in which it found that the first and
second applicants had not taken the oath to uphold the Spanish Constitution required
by Spanish electoral law, and consequently declared the seats allocated to them in
Parliament to be vacant and all prerogatives that might accrue to them by virtue of
their office to be suspended until they had taken that oath. On 27 June 2019, the then
President of Parliament informed the first and second applicants that he was unable
to treat them as future members of Parliament.
On 14 October 2019 the investigating judge of the Criminal Division of the Tribunal
Supremo (Supreme Court, Spain) issued a national arrest warrant, a European arrest
warrant and an international arrest warrant for the first applicant, so that he could be
tried in the criminal proceedings brought against them by the VOX political party, for
acts falling within the offences of rebellion, sedition and misappropriation of public
funds. On 4 November 2019, similar arrest warrants were issued by the same judge
Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
for the second and third applicants. On 13 January 2020, the President of the Tribunal
Supremo (Supreme Court) notified Parliament of the request to lift the parliamentary
immunity of the first and second applicants.
At the plenary sitting of 13 January 2020, Parliament took note, following the
Junqueras Vies judgment, of the election to Parliament of the first and second
applicants with effect from 2 July 2019, the date of the opening of the first session of
the newly elected Parliament following the elections of 26 May 2019. On 16 January
2020, the Vice-President of Parliament notified the plenary of the requests for waiver
of the immunity of the first and second applicants and referred them to the committee
responsible, namely Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee.
On 10 February 2020, following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland from the European Union on 31 January 2020, Parliament noted
the election of the third applicant as a Member of Parliament with effect from 1
February 2020. On the same day, the President of the Tribunal Supremo (Supreme
Court) notified Parliament of the request for the waiver of the third applicant’s
parliamentary immunity.
On 13 February 2020, the Vice-President of Parliament notified the plenary sitting of
the request to waive the third applicant’s immunity and referred it to the Committee
on Legal Affairs. After hearing the applicants, the Committee on Legal Affairs adopted
three reports on the requests for waiver of their immunity.
By three decisions of 9 March 2021, Parliament granted the requests for waiver of the
immunity of the three applicants, who then brought an action for annulment of those
three decisions before the General Court.
Background Documents T-115/20
Background Documents T-272/21
There will be one press release covering both cases.
Thursday 6th July
Judgment in Cases:
C-633/21 Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl (Refugee who committed
serious crime)
C-8/22 Commissaire général aux réfugiés and aux apatrides Asyl (Refugee who
committed serious crime)
C-402/22 Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (Particularly serious crime)
(Area of Freedom, Security and Justice)
These three cases concern queries by national courts with regards to the conditions
Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
for revocation of refugee status. In particular the courts require clarification of the
provision of Directive 2008/115 that authorises the Member States to revoke the
status granted to a refugee in the event of a threat to their society. They also ask the
Court to clarify whether Directive 2008/115 precludes a return decision from being
adopted in respect of a third-country national where it has been established that the
latter cannot be returned to his or her country of origin.
Background Documents C-633/21
Background Documents C-8/22
Background Documents C-402/22
There will be one press release covering these cases.
Thursday 6th July
Judgment in Case C-510/21 Austrian Airlines (First aid on board an aircraft)
(Transport)
The reference for a preliminary ruling is made in proceedings between DB, an air
passenger, and Austrian Airlines, established in Austria, concerning compensation for
damage caused by allegedly inadequate first aid carried out following burns suffered
on a flight operated by the defendant.
On 18 December 2016, the claimant took a flight from Tel Aviv (Israel) to Vienna
(Austria). During the flight, a coffee pot used to serve passengers fell off the catering
trolley, causing burns to the claimant from the hot coffee. As is apparent from the
decision to refer, the first aid given to the claimant caused him further injuries.
On 31 May 2019, the claimant submitted a claim for compensation in the sum of
€10,196 together with an application for a declaration that the defendant was liable for
all present and future damage arising from the said incident, arguing that the
defendant was liable not only for the accident but also for the inadequate first aid.
Moreover, the claim is not yet time-barred because the first aid on board does not
constitute an accident within the meaning of Article 17(1) of the Montreal Convention. I
In so far as the incident does not fall within the scope of that Convention, national law
should be applied to the dispute in the main proceedings, providing for a longer
limitation period.
The defendant contests the merits of that action, taking the view that the claimant’s
injuries were properly treated. In addition, the defendant requested that the claim also
be dismissed on the ground that it was time-barred due to the two-year limitation
period.
Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
The court of first instance and the Court of Appeal dismissed the claim, essentially on
the ground that the claim was time-barred. The appeal against the decision of the
Court of Appeal is before the referring court.
Background Documents C-510/21
There will be a press release for this case.
Thursday 6th July
Opinion in Case C-122/22 P Dyson and others v Commission
(Law governing the institutions)
In the 2021 judgment under appeal, the General Court had dismissed Dyson Ltd’s
compensation claims (valued at € 176.1 million) for damages allegedly suffered during
the period of time when a 2013 Commission delegated regulation to measure the
energy efficiency levels of vacuum cleaners was in force.
Dyson had successfully contested that regulation in previous proceedings before the
General Court, claiming that the standardised testing method used by the Commission
placed its bagless cyclonic vacuum cleaners at a disadvantage in relation to bagged
vacuum cleaners.
Indeed, in a judgment of 2018, the General Court had annulled that regulation on the
ground that the testing method carried out with an empty receptacle did not reflect
conditions as close as possible to actual conditions of use.
Background Documents C-122/22
There will be a press release for this case.
Week XXVIII – 10th to 14th July
Wednesday 12th July
General Court
Judgment in Case T-34/22 Cunsorziu di i Salamaghji Corsi – Consortium des
Charcutiers Corses and Others v Commission
(Agriculture and Fisheries)
Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
The names ‘Jambon sec de Corse’/’Jambon sec de Corse – Prisuttu’, ‘Lonzo de
Corse’/’Lonzo de Corse – Lonzu’ and ‘Coppa de Corse’/’Coppa de Corse – Coppa di
Corsica’ were registered as protected designations of origin (PDO) in 2014.
In 2015, the Cunsorziu di i Salamaghji Corsi – Consortium des Charcutiers Corses
(hereinafter the “Consortium”) applied to the French national authorities, pursuant to
Regulation No 1151/2012, to register the names “Jambon sec de l’Île de Beauté”,
“Lonzo de l’?le de Beauté” and “Coppa de l’?le de Beauté” as protected geographical
indications (PGI).
In 2018, these authorities issued orders approving the corresponding specifications,
with a view to forwarding them to the European Commission for approval.
The union holding the specifications for the PDOs ‘Jambon sec de Corse – Prisuttu’,
‘Lonzo de Corse – Lonzu’ and ‘Coppa de Corse – Coppa di Corsica’ applied to the
Conseil d’État (France) to have these decrees annulled.
It argued that the term “Île de Beauté” imitated or evoked the term “Corse” and
therefore introduced confusion with the names already registered as PDOs. The
Conseil d’État rejected the claim on the grounds that the use of different terms and
the difference in the protection afforded by a PDO and a PGI were such as to rule out
the risk of confusion.
The Conseil d’État rejected this application, on the grounds, in particular, that the use
of different terms and the difference in the protection conferred by a PDO, on the one
hand, and by a PGI, on the other, were such as to rule out this risk of confusion.
However, in its implementing decision 2021/1879, the Commission refused to register
the names ‘Jambon sec de l’?le de Beauté’, ‘Lonzo de l’?le de Beauté’ and ‘Coppa de l’Île
de Beauté’ as PGIs. It considered, inter alia, that it was common knowledge that the
name ‘Île de Beauté’ was a customary circumlocution univocally designating Corsica in
the eyes of French consumers. The proposed names would therefore infringe the
protection granted to the PDOs concerned by Regulation 1151/2012. As a result, they
do not meet the conditions for eligibility for registration.
The Consortium and certain of its members brought an action against this decision
before the General Court.
Background Documents T-34/22
There will be a press release in this case.
Newsletter
Weeks XXVII – XXVIII 3rd to 14th July 2023
Wednesday 12th July
General Court
Judgment in Case T-8/21 IFIC Holding v Commission
(Commercial Policy)
In 2018, the United States of America withdrew from the Iran Nuclear Deal, signed in
2015 to control Iran’s nuclear programme and lift economic sanctions against Iran. As
a result of this withdrawal, on the basis of the Iran Freedom and Counter-Proliferation
Act of 2012, the United States once again imposed sanctions on Iran and a list of
specific individuals. Since that date, all persons outside the United States have been