Review of Commission Implementing Directive (EU) 2025/2449
This Directive updates the examination protocols for specific plant varieties to align with the latest technical standards from the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO). It amends Directives 2003/90/EC and 2003/91/EC by replacing annexes with updated lists of plant species and their corresponding CPVO technical protocols or UPOV test guidelines for swede, fodder kale, rice, types of cabbage, tomato, and spinach. Member States must use these updated protocols for national catalogues, with a transitional measure allowing ongoing examinations started before 1 July 2026 to continue under previous standards.
Review of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2487
This regulation adjusts the financial thresholds in Directive 2009/81/EC, which governs procurement procedures in defense and security. Specifically, it updates the thresholds for supply and service contracts from EUR 443,000 to EUR 432,000 and for works contracts from EUR 5,538,000 to EUR 5,404,000. These changes align with the revised thresholds under the Agreement on Government Procurement under the World Trade Organization framework. Contracting authorities must use these new thresholds to determine which contracts are subject to the Directive’s specific rules, starting January 1, 2026.
Review of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2184
This regulation amends existing regulations concerning the fruit and vegetables sector (EU) 2016/232 and (EU) 2017/891, aimed at refining the governance and operation of producer organizations, updating the notification process for producer prices, and updating the implementation of import mechanisms.
It clarifies notification requirements for the extension of rules, definitions of transnational producer organizations and also clarifies that producer organizations can process products intended solely for processing themselves or through subsidiaries. It also provides a derogation for calculating the value of marketed production in cases of significant production decreases due to extreme events. It specifies the types, varieties, and packaging formats for which producer prices must be notified. Simplifies the assignment of identification numbers for producer organizations resulting from mergers. Modifies the notification requirements for prices and quantities of imported fruit and vegetables.
Review of Directive (EU) 2025/2459
This directive extends the period during which Member States can offer incentives for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles by reducing infrastructure or user charges, or by exempting them altogether. The extension pushes the deadline from December 31, 2025, to June 30, 2031, providing a longer timeframe for transport operators to benefit from these incentives.
Review of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2471
This regulation updates the list of individuals and entities subject to restrictive measures under Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, concerning sanctions for serious human rights violations. It updates entries for 27 natural persons and 12 entities by detailing identifying information and reasons for listing.
Review of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2448
This regulation specifies technical details for data collection on ‘Mental health and well-being’ within the income and living conditions domain for 2027, as mandated by Regulation (EU) 2019/1700. It lists the specific data points to be collected, including variables related to mental health experiences, their impact on social activities and work, reasons for mental health issues, access to professional help, and lifestyle factors.
Review of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2447
This regulation establishes rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 regarding the technical specifications, measures, and requirements for establishing and using a decentralised IT system for secure processing and communication of information. It defines methods of communication, communication protocols, minimum information security standards, and availability objectives for the system’s implementation. It also outlines the technical specifications for data exchange, ensuring that Member States and Eurojust can effectively and securely communicate and exchange necessary information.
Review of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2432
This regulation mandates the registration of imports of certain cold-rolled flat steel products originating from India, Japan, Taiwan, Türkiye, and Vietnam. The registration is a prerequisite for potentially levying anti-dumping duties retroactively, depending on the outcome of the ongoing anti-dumping investigation. It specifies that customs authorities must register imports of these steel products.
Review of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2185
This regulation amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/892, simplifying the calculation of standard import values, adjusting provisions for additional import duties, and removing obsolete references to operational programs of producer organizations in the fruit and vegetables sector. The goal is to reduce administrative burden and align the regulations with the EU Tariff Schedule of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture. Standard import values will now be fixed weekly, and Annex VII provides a list of products and periods during which additional import duties may apply.
Review of Court of Justice of the European Union – Furniture Design Copyright
This judgment clarifies the criteria for originality and infringement in the context of Directive 2001/29/EC, specifically for furniture design. It specifies that there is no “rule and exception” relationship between design protection and copyright protection. The originality of applied art is assessed using the same criteria as other works. A work of applied art is original if it reflects the author’s personality through free and creative choices. Technical constraints do not automatically disqualify a design, but the author’s personality must be evident. To establish copyright infringement, the creative elements of the protected work must be recognizably reproduced in the infringing item.
Review of Court of Justice of the European Union – Consumer Contracts
This judgment addresses the interpretation of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (“Rome I Regulation”) concerning consumer contracts and Article 3(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts. The important point is that Article 6(1) of Regulation No 593/2008 does not apply to a contract where the conditions set out in that provision were not met on the date on which that contract was concluded, but are subsequently met.
Review of Amending Protocol – EU and Liechtenstein
This Amending Protocol updates the Agreement between the European Union and Liechtenstein on the automatic exchange of financial account information to align with the newest OECD standards for the automatic exchange of information, including updates concerning digital assets and aiming to prevent double reporting. It expands reporting requirements, strengthens due diligence, and addresses data protection in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Review of Amending Protocol – EU and Monaco
This Amending Protocol modifies the Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Monaco regarding the automatic exchange of financial account information. The changes align the agreement with the newest OECD standards, address digital assets, improve information exchange, prevent redundant reporting, and strengthen due diligence while ensuring data protection. Important features include expanded reporting to include digital financial products, measures to avoid duplicate reporting, updated data protection aligned with GDPR, and transitional measures for implementation.
Review of Amending Protocol – EU and San Marino
This Amending Protocol modifies the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of San Marino on the Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information to Improve International Tax Compliance. The protocol updates the existing agreement to align with the newest OECD standards, specifically addressing digital assets and aiming to prevent redundant reporting with the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF). It also introduces more detailed reporting requirements and strengthens due diligence procedures to enhance the reliability of exchanged information. The amending protocol includes provisions for data protection and sets out conditions for the use and transfer of personal data.
Review of Amending Protocol – EU and Andorra
This Amending Protocol modifies the existing Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Andorra regarding the automatic exchange of financial account information to enhance international tax compliance. The main goal is to update the agreement to align with the newest standards set by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), particularly concerning digital assets and the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF). The protocol seeks to prevent redundant reporting between the updated Global Standard and CARF, improve the reliability of exchanged information, and introduce new categories for excluded accounts. It also addresses the processing and retention of personal data under relevant data protection laws.
Review of EFTA Surveillance Authority Notice
This notice from the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) provides the base rates for calculating interest rates used when recovering illegal state aid and the reference/discount rates applicable in the EFTA States (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway), effective as of 1 September 2025. These rates are crucial for ensuring fair competition within the European Economic Area (EEA) by neutralizing the advantage gained by companies that have received unlawful state aid.
Review of Oslo District Court Request to EFTA Court
This document is a request from the Oslo District Court to the EFTA Court for an Advisory Opinion regarding the interpretation and application of the SEA Directive (Directive 2001/42/EC) in a case concerning Redd Ullevål Sykehus (a hospital) and the Norwegian State. The District Court seeks clarification on whether certain decisions related to the development of a new hospital structure fall within the scope of the SEA Directive and whether national rules regarding procedural errors can be applied when there has been alleged non-compliance with the SEA Directive.
Review of each of legal acts published today:
Commission Implementing Directive (EU) 2025/2449 of 4 December 2025 amending Directives 2003/90/EC and 2003/91/EC as regards the protocols for the examination of varieties of swede, fodder kale, rice, kale group, palm kale group, tronchuda group (Portuguese cabbage), Chinese cabbage, tomato and spinach
This Commission Implementing Directive (EU) 2025/2449 amends Directives 2003/90/EC and 2003/91/EC, updating the examination protocols for certain plant varieties, including swede, fodder kale, rice, several types of cabbage, tomato, and spinach. The updates reflect the latest technical protocols developed by the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO). The Directive ensures that Member States’ national catalogues of agricultural and vegetable plant species align with these updated protocols.
The Directive modifies the annexes of Directives 2003/90/EC and 2003/91/EC. Specifically, it replaces Annexes I and II of Directive 2003/90/EC and Annex I of Directive 2003/91/EC with updated lists of plant species and their corresponding CPVO technical protocols or UPOV test guidelines. The main change involves updating the CPVO protocols for swede, fodder kale, rice, kale group, palm kale group, tronchuda group (Portuguese cabbage), Chinese cabbage, tomato, and spinach. Additionally, the UPOV guideline for turnip rape is replaced by a CPVO protocol.
The most important provisions for practical use are the updated lists of species and their corresponding examination protocols in the amended annexes. These protocols detail the characteristics to be examined and the minimum conditions for examining varieties of agricultural and vegetable plant species. Member States must comply with these updated protocols when including varieties in their national catalogues. The Directive includes a transitional measure, stating that official examinations started but not finalised before 1 July 2026 will continue under the previous versions of Directives 2003/90/EC and 2003/91/EC.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2487 of 2 December 2025 amending Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council in respect of the thresholds for supply, service and works contracts
This Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2487 amends Directive 2009/81/EC, which concerns procurement procedures in the fields of defense and security. The key purpose of this regulation is to update the financial thresholds that determine when the Directive’s rules apply to supply, service, and works contracts. These adjustments are necessary to align with the revised thresholds set in the Agreement on Government Procurement under the World Trade Organization framework.
The regulation consists of two articles. Article 1 amends Article 8 of Directive 2009/81/EC by adjusting the financial thresholds for contracts. Specifically, it replaces the existing threshold of EUR 443,000 with EUR 432,000 in point (a) and EUR 5,538,000 with EUR 5,404,000 in point (b). Article 2 specifies that the regulation will come into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and will apply from 1 January 2026.
The most important provision is Article 1, which directly modifies the thresholds that contracting authorities and entities in the defense and security sectors must consider when awarding contracts. These updated thresholds will determine which contracts are subject to the specific procurement rules outlined in Directive 2009/81/EC.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2184 of 10 September 2025 amending Delegated Regulations (EU) 2016/232 and (EU) 2017/891 as regards certain rules on producer organisations, notification obligations of producer prices and implementation of certain import mechanisms in the fruit and vegetables sector
Okay, I will provide you with a detailed description of the provisions of this act.
**1. Essence of the Act:**
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2184 amends existing regulations (EU) 2016/232 and (EU) 2017/891 concerning the fruit and vegetables sector. The amendments aim to improve the governance and operation of producer organizations, refine the notification process for producer prices, and update the implementation of import mechanisms. These changes address issues such as the definition of transnational producer organizations, the calculation of the value of marketed production, and the handling of extreme events affecting production.
**2. Structure and Main Provisions:**
The Regulation is structured as an amending act, modifying specific articles and annexes of two existing Delegated Regulations: (EU) 2016/232 and (EU) 2017/891.
* **Amendments to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/232:**
* Clarifies notification requirements for the extension of rules in the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors, specifically regarding the economic areas where these extensions apply.
* **Amendments to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/891:**
* **Producer Organizations:** Aligns definitions of transnational producer organizations with those in Regulation (EU) 2016/232. Clarifies that producer organizations can process products intended solely for processing themselves or through subsidiaries.
* **Value of Marketed Production:** Updates references to the correct legal acts (Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/126) for calculating the value of marketed production. Introduces a derogation for calculating the value of marketed production in cases of significant production decreases due to extreme events.
* **Mergers:** Simplifies the assignment of identification numbers for producer organizations resulting from mergers.
* **Notification of Producer Prices:** Specifies the types, varieties, and packaging formats for which producer prices must be notified. Aligns the methodology for price collection with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1185.
* **Operational Programmes:** Clarifies the conditions under which payments for operational programs can be suspended or recovered if producer organizations fail to meet recognition criteria.
* **Extension of Rules:** Specifies that organic producers are excluded from representativeness calculations unless the extension of rules explicitly covers them.
* **Import Mechanisms:** Modifies the notification requirements for prices and quantities of imported fruit and vegetables, including the frequency of notifications (weekly), the definition of a “market week,” and alternative data collection methods.
* **Entry Price System:** Clarifies the periods of application for guarantees required from importers under the entry price system and updates the product codes in Annex VII to reflect the current Combined Nomenclature.
**3. Main Provisions for Practical Use:**
* **Derogation for Extreme Events (Article 2(4)):** This provision allows producer organizations to maintain their recognition even if their production value significantly decreases due to unforeseen events like natural disasters. This is crucial for ensuring the stability of producer organizations facing external shocks.
* **Notification of Producer Prices (Article 2(9)):** The detailed requirements for notifying producer prices, including specific products, types, and packaging, are essential for market transparency and monitoring.
* **Import Mechanisms (Article 2(14)):** The revised rules for notifying prices and quantities of imported products, along with the updated product list in Annex VII, are vital for the effective functioning of the entry price system and the protection of the EU market.
* **Entry Price System (Article 2(15)):** The clarification on the periods of application where the guarantee to be provided by the importer is required is an important element of trade with third countries.
Directive (EU) 2025/2459 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2025 amending Directive 1999/62/EC as regards the extension of the period in which zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles can benefit from significantly reduced rates of infrastructure or user charges or from exemptions to pay them (Text with EEA relevance)
Directive (EU) 2025/2459 extends the period during which Member States can offer incentives for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles by significantly reducing infrastructure or user charges, or by exempting them altogether. This extension aims to encourage the adoption of these vehicles by addressing the high upfront costs that currently hinder their widespread use. The directive aligns the timeframe for these incentives with the CO2 emission reduction targets set for heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers, ensuring a consistent approach to promoting sustainable transportation.
The directive consists of four articles. Article 1 amends Directive 1999/62/EC, specifically extending the deadline for reduced rates or exemptions on infrastructure and user charges for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles from December 31, 2025, to June 30, 2031. Article 2 requires Member States to inform the Commission about the measures they take in accordance with this directive. Article 3 states that the directive will come into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Article 4 specifies that the directive is addressed to the Member States.
The most important provision is the extension of the period during which Member States can apply reduced rates or exemptions for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles until June 30, 2031. This extension provides a longer timeframe for transport operators to benefit from these incentives, making zero-emission vehicles more financially attractive and supporting the broader deployment of sustainable transportation solutions.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2471 of 4 December 2025 implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses
This Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2471 updates the list of individuals and entities subject to restrictive measures under Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, which concerns sanctions for serious human rights violations and abuses. The regulation amends Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2020/1998, updating entries for 27 natural persons and 12 entities. This regulation is binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
The structure of the act is straightforward: it consists of two articles and an annex. Article 1 states that Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation. Article 2 specifies that the regulation will enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Annex provides the updated entries for both natural persons and legal entities, replacing previous entries with new information.
The most important provision of this act is the updated list in the Annex, which details the individuals and entities subject to restrictive measures. These updates include identifying information, reasons for listing, and the date of listing. The reasons for listing provide a summary of why these individuals and entities are subject to sanctions, focusing on their involvement in serious human rights violations and abuses.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2448 of 4 December 2025 specifying the technical items of the data sets for the 2027 ad hoc subject on Mental health and well-being in the income and living conditions domain pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1700 of the European Parliament and of the Council
This Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2448 specifies the technical details for data collection on the ad hoc subject of ‘Mental health and well-being’ within the income and living conditions domain for the year 2027. This data collection is mandated by Regulation (EU) 2019/1700, which establishes a common framework for European statistics related to persons and households. The regulation aims to ensure accurate implementation of data collection, which is crucial for informing policies related to the European Semester, the European Pillar of Social Rights, and the European Health Union initiative.
The structure of the regulation is straightforward. It consists of two articles and an annex. Article 1 states that the technical items for the data sets regarding the 2027 ad hoc subject ‘Mental health and well-being’ are those detailed in the Annex, including variable identifiers, names, modality labels and codes, collection units, and reference periods. Article 2 specifies that the regulation will come into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and that it is binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. The Annex provides a detailed list of variables to be collected, including specific questions related to mental health experiences, their impact on social activities and work, reasons for mental health issues, access to professional help, and lifestyle factors.
The main provisions of this regulation are in the Annex, which lists the specific data points to be collected. These include variables such as “Feeling down, depressed or anxious,” “Impact of mental health and well-being on social activities,” “Main reason for being down, depressed or anxious,” and “Consultation with a mental health specialist/professional.” Additionally, the Annex covers variables related to work-life balance, experiences of discrimination, and the use of social media. Member states must adhere to these specifications to ensure comparable data collection across the EU.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2447 of 4 December 2025 laying down the rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as regards the technical specifications, measures and other requirements for the establishment and use of the decentralised IT system for secure processing and communication of information
This is a description of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2447.
This regulation lays down the rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2018/1727 regarding the technical specifications, measures, and other requirements for establishing and using a decentralised IT system for secure processing and communication of information. This system aims to facilitate secure digital communication between the competent national authorities of the Member States and Eurojust. The regulation specifies methods of communication, communication protocols, minimum information security standards, and availability objectives for the system’s implementation.
The regulation consists of 4 articles and 3 annexes.
* **Article 1** defines that the technical specifications, measures, and objectives of the decentralised IT system are set out in Annex I.
* **Article 2** defines that the digital procedural standards applicable to the electronic communication through the decentralised IT system are set out in Annex II.
* **Article 3** defines that the technical specifications and the format for the transmission of fingerprints and photographs are set out in Annex III.
* **Article 4** specifies that the regulation will enter into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
**Annex I** outlines the technical specifications, measures, and objectives of the decentralised IT system, including methods of communication, communication protocols, information security objectives, and minimum availability objectives. It also details the structure and responsibilities related to the Competent authorities/Court database (CDB).
**Annex II** details the digital procedural standards, including technical specifications for business process models and data schemas for exchanging information related to the European Judicial Counter-Terrorism Register (CTR), serious crime, general information, and facilitation and support requests.
**Annex III** sets out the technical specifications for the transmission of fingerprints and photographs, including the formats and standards to be followed.
The most important provisions for its use are those that define the technical specifications for data exchange (Annex I and II), ensuring that Member States and Eurojust can effectively and securely communicate and exchange necessary information. The specifications for transmitting fingerprints and photographs (Annex III) are also crucial for identifying individuals involved in criminal proceedings, particularly those related to terrorism.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2432 of 3 December 2025 making imports of certain cold-rolled flat steel products originating in India, Japan, Taiwan, Türkiye and Vietnam subject to registration with a view to allowing the levy of anti-dumping duties on the imports subject to registration
This Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2432 mandates the registration of imports of certain cold-rolled flat steel products originating from India, Japan, Taiwan, Türkiye, and Vietnam. The purpose of this registration is to enable the retroactive imposition of anti-dumping duties if the ongoing investigation determines that such duties are warranted. The regulation outlines the specific types of steel products subject to registration, providing clarity through CN and TARIC codes.
The regulation consists of a preamble that outlines the reasons for the registration, followed by two articles. Article 1 directs customs authorities to register imports of the specified cold-rolled flat steel products from the identified countries, detailing the product characteristics and relevant CN/TARIC codes. This registration is set to expire nine months after the regulation’s entry into force. Article 2 stipulates that the regulation will take effect the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and confirms that the regulation is binding and directly applicable in all Member States. This regulation does not introduce new duties or change existing trade policies but sets the stage for potential future anti-dumping measures.
The most important provision of this act is Article 1, which specifies that customs authorities must register imports of flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, or other alloy steel (excluding stainless steel), that are cold-rolled, not clad, plated, or coated, and not further worked than cold-rolled. The countries of origin are India, Japan, Taiwan, Türkiye, and Vietnam. The registration is a prerequisite for potentially levying anti-dumping duties retroactively, depending on the outcome of the ongoing anti-dumping investigation.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2185 of 10 September 2025 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/892 as regards certain procedures, the calculation of standard import values and additional import duties
This Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2185 amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/892, focusing on procedures related to the fruit and vegetables sector. The key changes involve simplifying the calculation of standard import values, adjusting provisions for additional import duties, and removing obsolete references to operational programs of producer organizations. The goal is to reduce administrative burden and align the regulations with the EU Tariff Schedule of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.
The regulation consists of two articles and one annex. Article 1 details the amendments to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/892, including replacing Article 23 regarding requests for recognition of producer organizations, modifying Article 38 on the calculation of standard import values (fixing them weekly), and amending Articles 39, 40, and 41 concerning additional import duties. It also replaces Annex VII, which lists products and periods for applying additional import duties. Article 2 states that the regulation will enter into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
The most important provisions for practical use are those concerning the calculation and application of standard import values and additional import duties. Specifically, the standard import values will now be fixed weekly, and the conditions for applying additional import duties are clarified and aligned with the EU Tariff Schedule of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture. Annex VII provides a detailed list of products and the periods during which additional import duties may apply, which is crucial for importers and customs authorities.
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 4 December 2025.Mio AB and Others v Galleri Mikael & Thomas Asplund Aktiebolag.References for a preliminary ruling – Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society – Directive 2001/29/EC – Articles 2 to 4 – Reproduction right – Concept of ‘work’ – Copyright protection of works of applied art – Assessment of the originality of subject matter of applied art – Concept of ‘free and creative choices’ – Criteria for the assessment of those choices – Assessment of the infringement of exclusive rights.Case C-580/23.
This judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union addresses the scope of copyright protection for works of applied art, specifically concerning furniture design. The Court clarifies the criteria for originality and infringement in the context of Directive 2001/29/EC, which harmonizes certain aspects of copyright in the information society. The central issue revolves around how to determine whether a design, particularly a functional object, qualifies for copyright protection and what constitutes an infringement of that protection.
The judgment is structured around answering questions referred by courts in Sweden and Germany in two separate cases involving furniture designs. The Court addresses whether stricter requirements should apply to works of applied art compared to other types of works when assessing originality. It clarifies how to assess the originality of applied art, focusing on the creative process, the author’s intentions, and the role of external factors. Finally, it outlines how to assess copyright infringement, emphasizing the reproduction of creative elements rather than overall visual impression.
The most important provisions of the judgment are the following:
1. There is no “rule and exception” relationship between design protection and copyright protection. The originality of applied art is assessed using the same criteria as other works.
2. A work of applied art is original if it reflects the author’s personality through free and creative choices. Technical constraints do not automatically disqualify a design, but the author’s personality must be evident.
3. To establish copyright infringement, the creative elements of the protected work must be recognizably reproduced in the infringing item. The overall visual impression and the degree of originality of the work are not relevant factors in determining infringement.
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 4 December 2025.AY v Liechtensteinische Landesbank (Österreich) AG.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 – Article 3(1) and (2) – Choice of the applicable law – Article 6 – Scope – Contract concluded between a professional and a consumer residing in another Member State – Activity of the professional directed to the Member State in which the consumer has his or her habitual residence after the date of conclusion of the contract containing a choice-of-law clause.Case C-279/24.
This is a judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding the interpretation of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (“Rome I Regulation”) concerning consumer contracts and Article 3(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts. The case revolves around a dispute between an Italian consumer (AY) and an Austrian bank (Liechtensteinische Landesbank (Österreich) AG) regarding losses incurred from financial products purchased through the bank. The key issue is whether Italian law, as the consumer’s place of residence, should apply to the transactions, even though the initial contract with the bank specified Austrian law.
The judgment is structured as follows:
1. **Introduction:** Briefly outlines the subject matter and the parties involved.
2. **Legal Context:**
* **Regulation No 593/2008 (Rome I):** Focuses on recitals and Articles 3 and 6, which deal with freedom of choice of law and consumer contracts, respectively.
* **Directive 93/13:** Cites Article 3(1) regarding unfair contract terms.
* **Austrian Law:** Includes Paragraph 879(3) of the Civil Code concerning unfair contractual terms.
3. **The Dispute in the Main Proceedings and the Questions Referred for a Preliminary Ruling:** Details the factual background of the case, including the consumer’s transactions, the bank’s activities, and the questions posed by the Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof).
4. **Consideration of the Questions Referred:**
* **The First Question:** Addresses whether Article 6(1) of the Rome I Regulation applies if its conditions were met after the initial contract was concluded.
* **The Second and Third Questions:** These are contingent on an affirmative answer to the first question and relate to exceptions under Article 6(4)(a) and whether the choice-of-law clause is unfair.
5. **Costs:** Determines the allocation of costs in the proceedings.
6. **Ruling:** Provides the Court’s decision.
The most important provision of the act is that Article 6(1) of Regulation No 593/2008 does not apply to a contract concluded between a consumer and a bank where the conditions set out in that provision were not met on the date on which that contract was concluded, but are subsequently met. This means that the law applicable to the contract is determined at the time of its conclusion, and subsequent changes in the professional’s activities do not alter the applicable law.
Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the automatic exchange of financial account information to improve international tax compliance
This Amending Protocol updates the Agreement between the European Union and Liechtenstein on the automatic exchange of financial account information. The main goal is to align the agreement with the newest OECD standards for the automatic exchange of information, including updates concerning digital assets and aiming to prevent double reporting. The protocol ensures more detailed reporting requirements and stronger due diligence procedures to improve the reliability of exchanged information. It also addresses data protection in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
The Amending Protocol modifies several articles and annexes of the original Agreement. Key changes include:
* **Article 1**: Adds a definition of “Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework.”
* **Article 2**: Expands reporting requirements to include details about Controlling Persons and Equity Interest holders, and introduces an exception for reporting gross proceeds from the sale of Financial Assets already reported under the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework.
* **Article 3**: Specifies timelines for exchanging new information and using a common reporting standard schema.
* **Article 6**: Updates data protection rules, aligning them with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and sets retention periods for personal data.
* **Article 7**: Modifies conditions for suspending information exchange due to non-compliance.
* **Article 9**: Updates the termination clause.
* **Annex I**: Includes more detailed reporting requirements, updates due diligence procedures, and adds a new category for “Qualified Non-Profit Entities.”
* **Annex II**: Provides interpretations for “Central Bank Digital Currency” and clarifies the status of “Qualified Non-Profit Entities.”
* **Annex III**: Deletes a subparagraph related to transitional measures.
The most important provisions for practical use include the expanded reporting requirements under Article 2, particularly concerning Controlling Persons and Equity Interest holders, and the option for Reporting Financial Institutions to avoid double reporting of gross proceeds under the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework. The updated data protection rules in Article 6 and the new definitions in Annex I, especially those related to digital assets and “Qualified Non-Profit Entities,” are also crucial for ensuring compliance.
Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Monaco on the exchange of financial account information to improve international tax compliance in accordance with the Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters developed by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
This Amending Protocol modifies the existing Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Monaco regarding the automatic exchange of financial account information to enhance international tax compliance. The changes align the agreement with the newest standards set by the OECD, including updates to address digital assets and to improve the efficiency and reliability of information exchange. The protocol aims to prevent redundant reporting between the updated Global Standard and the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF). It also introduces more detailed reporting requirements and strengthens due diligence procedures, while ensuring the protection of personal data.
The Amending Protocol includes several key changes:
* **Article 1** introduces a definition of “Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework”.
* **Article 2** amends the information to be exchanged, including details about Controlling Persons and Equity Interest holders, and introduces a provision to avoid duplicate reporting of gross proceeds from the sale of Financial Assets already reported under the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework.
* **Article 3** modifies the timing of information exchange, particularly for accounts affected by the new amendments.
* **Article 6** updates the provisions on data protection, referencing the EU’s GDPR and Monaco’s data protection law, and sets limits on data retention periods.
* **Article 7** revises the conditions under which information exchange can be suspended due to non-compliance.
* **Article 9** updates the terms for terminating the agreement, ensuring continued data protection even after termination.
* **Annex I** includes detailed amendments to reporting requirements, definitions, and due diligence procedures, including those related to Specified Electronic Money Products, Central Bank Digital Currencies and Crypto-Assets. It also adds a section on transitional measures.
* **Annex III** is amended to provide additional data protection safeguards.
The most important provisions for practical use include:
* The expanded scope of reporting to include digital financial products like Specified Electronic Money Products and Central Bank Digital Currencies.
* The optional provision allowing Reporting Financial Institutions to avoid duplicate reporting of gross proceeds for assets reported under both the Global Standard and the CARF.
* The updated data protection requirements, which align with GDPR and Monaco’s data protection laws, ensuring the rights of individuals are protected.
* The transitional measures that provide a timeline for implementing the new reporting requirements, particularly for existing accounts.
* The new “Excluded Account” category for Capital Contribution Accounts and a de minimis threshold for reporting Depository Accounts holding Specified Electronic Money Products.
Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of San Marino on the Automatic Exchange of financial account information to improve international tax compliance
This is an Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of San Marino on the Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information to Improve International Tax Compliance. The protocol updates the existing agreement to align with the newest OECD standards, specifically addressing digital assets and aiming to prevent redundant reporting with the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF). It also introduces more detailed reporting requirements and strengthens due diligence procedures to enhance the reliability of exchanged information. The amending protocol includes provisions for data protection and sets out conditions for the use and transfer of personal data.
The Amending Protocol modifies several articles and annexes of the original agreement. Key changes include:
* **Article 1**: Adds a definition of “Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework.”
* **Article 2**: Expands the information to be exchanged, including details about controlling persons and their roles in entities, and introduces provisions to avoid duplicate reporting of gross proceeds from financial assets already reported under the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework.
* **Article 3**: Specifies the timing for the exchange of new information required by the amending protocol, particularly concerning accounts treated as reportable due to the protocol’s amendments.
* **Article 6**: Updates data protection rules, aligning them with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and San Marino’s Law No. 171, and details the information that Reporting Financial Institutions must provide to Reportable Persons.
* **Article 7**: Modifies the conditions under which the exchange of information can be suspended due to non-compliance.
* **Article 9**: Updates the terms for termination of the agreement, ensuring continued confidentiality and data protection.
* **Annex I**: Introduces more detailed reporting requirements, including the reporting of the jurisdiction(s) of residence for Reportable Persons and the roles by virtue of which each Reportable Person is a Controlling Person or Equity Interest holder of the Entity. It also defines “Specified Electronic Money Product,” “Central Bank Digital Currency,” “Crypto-Asset,” and “Relevant Crypto-Asset,” and provides transitional measures for the implementation of these new requirements.
* **Annex III**: Enhances data protection safeguards, emphasizing data minimization, transparency, and the rights of individuals to access, rectify, and erase their data.
The most important provisions for practical use include:
* The expanded scope of reportable information, particularly regarding controlling persons and equity interest holders, which increases the transparency of financial accounts.
* The provisions addressing crypto-assets and digital currencies, ensuring that these new forms of assets are included in the automatic exchange of information framework.
* The data protection safeguards, which ensure that personal data is processed fairly and transparently, and that individuals have the right to access and correct their data.
* The transitional measures in Section XI of Annex I, which provide guidance on the implementation of the new reporting requirements for existing accounts.
Amending Protocol to the Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Andorra on the automatic exchange of financial account information to improve international tax compliance
This Amending Protocol modifies the existing Agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Andorra regarding the automatic exchange of financial account information to enhance international tax compliance. The main goal is to update the agreement to align with the newest standards set by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), particularly concerning digital assets and the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF). The protocol seeks to prevent redundant reporting between the updated Global Standard and CARF, improve the reliability of exchanged information, and introduce new categories for excluded accounts. It also addresses the processing and retention of personal data under relevant data protection laws.
The Amending Protocol consists of several articles that amend the original Agreement. Article 1 details the specific amendments, including adding a definition for “Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework,” modifying reporting requirements for financial accounts, and updating due diligence procedures. It also introduces provisions for handling crypto-assets and digital currencies, and clarifies the roles of controlling persons and equity interest holders. Article 2 concerns the entry into force and application of the protocol, specifying that it requires ratification or approval by both parties and will generally take effect on the first day of January following the last notification of completion of procedures. However, certain provisions related to CARF will apply from the date Andorra begins to apply CARF with all Member States. Article 3 states that the protocol is drawn up in multiple languages, each being equally authentic. Additionally, there are joint declarations addressing the entry into force, interpretation of the agreement and annexes, and alignment with OECD standards on transparency.
Key provisions include the expanded scope of reporting to include digital financial products like Specified Electronic Money Products and Central Bank Digital Currencies, aiming to capture new financial instruments. The protocol introduces measures to avoid duplicate reporting where both the updated Global Standard and CARF apply, such as allowing Reporting Financial Institutions to opt out of gross proceeds reporting for assets reported under CARF. It also adds a new “Excluded Account” category for Capital Contribution Accounts and sets a de minimis threshold for reporting Depository Accounts holding Specified Electronic Money Products. The updated due diligence procedures and more detailed reporting requirements are also crucial for improving the accuracy and utility of the exchanged information.
EFTA Surveillance Authority’s notice on state aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for the EFTA States applicable as of 1 September 2025 (Published in accordance with the rules on reference and discount rates set out in Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelinesand Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL 14 July 2004)
This notice from the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) concerns the interest rates used when recovering illegal state aid and the reference/discount rates applicable in the EFTA States (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway). It provides the base rates for calculating these rates, effective as of 1 September 2025. These rates are crucial for ensuring fair competition within the European Economic Area (EEA) by neutralizing the advantage gained by companies that have received unlawful state aid.
The notice is structured as follows:
1. **Reference to Legal Basis:** It cites the relevant legal provisions, namely Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines and Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL.
2. **Method of Calculation:** It explains that base rates are calculated according to the methodology outlined in ESA’s State Aid Guidelines, as amended by ESA’s Decision No 788/08/COL. It also clarifies that appropriate margins must be added to the base rate to obtain the applicable reference rates, in accordance with the State Aid Guidelines.
3. **Table of Base Rates:** The core of the notice is a table presenting the base rates for Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway, effective from 1 September 2025.
The most important provision of this notice is the table specifying the base rates for each EFTA State. These rates are the foundation for determining the actual interest rates used in state aid recovery and for discounting future cash flows in certain state aid assessments. Businesses, legal professionals, and national authorities in the EFTA States need to be aware of these rates to ensure compliance with state aid rules.
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by the Oslo District Court dated 8 July 2025 in the case of Redd Ullevål Sykehus v Norwegian State, represented by the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (Staten v/ Kommunal- og distriktdepartementet) (Case E-17/25)
This document is a request from the Oslo District Court to the EFTA Court for an Advisory Opinion regarding the interpretation and application of the SEA Directive (Directive 2001/42/EC) in a case concerning Redd Ullevål Sykehus (a hospital) and the Norwegian State. The District Court seeks clarification on whether certain decisions related to the development of a new hospital structure fall within the scope of the SEA Directive and whether national rules regarding procedural errors can be applied when there has been alleged non-compliance with the SEA Directive.
The document outlines two main questions for the EFTA Court:
1. **Scope of the SEA Directive:** The Oslo District Court is asking for guidance on how to determine whether the environmental impact assessment requirements of the SEA Directive apply to (1) two zoning plans, (2) a health enterprise’s decision on the target image for a new hospital structure, and (3) the Parliament’s loan limit decision for the hospital development. The court seeks clarification on the factors to consider when determining if these decisions constitute a “plan” under the SEA Directive.
2. **National Rules on Errors:** The District Court questions whether it is compatible with EEA law, specifically Article 3 of the EEA Agreement (duty of loyalty), to apply a national rule (section 41 of the Norwegian Public Administration Act) that allows a decision to be upheld despite a procedural error if the error could not have affected the substance of the decision, in a case where non-compliance with the SEA Directive is alleged.
The document then presents the specific questions in more detail:
1. **Factors for Assessing “Plan” under SEA Directive:** This section breaks down the first question into specific factors to consider when assessing whether the decisions related to the hospital development constitute a “plan” under the SEA Directive. It asks whether the decision-making entity (State vs. health enterprise), the project’s size and nature, and the existence of an EIA Directive assessment influence the applicability of the SEA Directive.
2. **Compatibility of National Rule on Errors with EEA Agreement:** This section elaborates on the second question, asking for the legal criteria relevant when assessing whether a national rule allowing for the validation of administrative decisions despite procedural errors is compatible with the EEA Agreement, specifically in cases involving alleged infringement of the SEA Directive.
The main provisions of this document are the specific questions posed by the Oslo District Court to the EFTA Court. These questions seek clarification on the scope and application of the SEA Directive and the compatibility of national procedural rules with EEA law.
The most important aspect of this document is the request for clarification on the scope of the SEA Directive and how it interacts with national procedural rules. The EFTA Court’s advisory opinion will have significant implications for how environmental impact assessments are conducted in Norway and potentially other EFTA countries, as well as how procedural errors in environmental decision-making are addressed.
