Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2184
This regulation modifies existing rules for the fruit and vegetables sector. Member States must now notify specific economic areas where extended rules apply. The regulation clarifies definitions for transnational producer organizations and updates references for calculating the value of marketed production, including a derogation for significant production decreases due to extreme events. It simplifies the process for mergers, specifies notification requirements for producer prices, clarifies payment suspension criteria, and ensures organic production is considered in rule extensions. Finally, it modifies rules for notifying import prices and quantities, including a new definition of “market week” and updates product codes.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/2487
This regulation adjusts the financial thresholds of Directive 2009/81/EC, which governs procurement in defense and security. Effective January 1, 2026, the thresholds are lowered: from EUR 443,000 to EUR 432,000 for one category, and from EUR 5,538,000 to EUR 5,404,000 for another. These changes align EU law with the revised thresholds of the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Government Procurement.
Directive (EU) 2025/2459
This directive extends the period during which Member States can offer incentives for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles. Member States can now reduce or eliminate infrastructure and user charges until June 30, 2031, instead of the original deadline of December 31, 2025. This aligns the incentive timeline with CO2 emission reduction targets for heavy-duty vehicles.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2432
This regulation mandates the registration of imports of specific cold-rolled flat steel products from India, Japan, Taiwan, Türkiye, and Vietnam. This is to allow for possible retroactive anti-dumping duties if an investigation determines they are warranted. The registration expires nine months after the regulation’s entry into force. Importers and customs authorities must determine if their goods fall under the defined product characteristics and countries of origin.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2185
This regulation amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/892, focusing on the fruit and vegetables sector. Changes include simplifying the calculation of standard import values (now fixed weekly), adjusting the application of additional import duties, and removing outdated provisions related to operational programs of producer organizations. Businesses importing goods in this sector should pay attention to the revised Annex VII, which lists the products and periods for applying additional import duties based on updated CN codes.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1952
This regulation outlines measures to prevent the spread of the Asian longhorned beetle within the EU, replacing Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/893. It requires annual surveys of host plants, establishes contingency plans, and defines demarcated areas for eradication and containment. The regulation details actions to be taken in these areas, including felling infested plants and restricting the movement of potentially infested material. Member States have specific reporting obligations.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1953
This regulation amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 to update protective measures against the Asian longhorned beetle and the citrus longhorned beetle. It adjusts requirements for plants, plant products, and wood from third countries or moving within the EU. New requirements are set for plants and wood from affected countries, the scope of host plants has been adjusted, and sampling requirements are modified to detect a 1% infestation level with 99% confidence. Specific rules are set for moving plants and wood from demarcated areas.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2444
This regulation amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2058, adjusting the frequency of identity checks on retail goods entering Northern Ireland from other parts of the United Kingdom. The new frequency is 8%, reduced from 10%, provided the goods meet specific pre-packing and marking requirements for milk and dairy products as outlined in Regulation (EU) 2023/1231.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2461
This regulation amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2095 concerning measures against the citrus longhorned beetle. The amendment addresses the pest’s establishment in certain Italian areas, updates the list of host plants to include the entire *Aesculus* genus, and refines survey requirements. The confidence level required for surveys around production sites within demarcated areas is increased (99% within 1 km).
Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of December 3, 2025, in Case T-1107/23, Elena Petrovna Timchenko v. Council of the European Union
The General Court dismissed Elena Timchenko’s challenge to EU sanctions imposed against her. The Court upheld the Council’s decision to maintain her name on sanctions lists, finding sufficient evidence that she was “associated with” her husband, Gennady Timchenko, who was already sanctioned for his ties to President Putin and his involvement in actions undermining Ukraine’s integrity. The judgment clarifies the interpretation of “associated with” in the context of EU sanctions.
EFTA Surveillance Authority Notice
This notice establishes the applicable interest rates for the recovery of unlawful state aid and the reference/discount rates for EFTA States (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway), effective from September 1, 2025. These rates are used to neutralize the financial advantage gained by companies that have received illegal state support and ensure fair competition within the European Economic Area (EEA).
Request from the Oslo District Court to the EFTA Court
The Oslo District Court requests an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court regarding the interpretation and application of the SEA Directive (Directive 2001/42/EC) in a case concerning a hospital development project. The request seeks clarification on whether specific decisions related to the new hospital structure fall within the scope of the SEA Directive and whether national rules on procedural errors can be applied when there is alleged non-compliance with the SEA Directive.
Review of each of legal acts published today:
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 a detailed description of the provisions of the 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 obligations for producer prices, and update the implementation of import mechanisms. These changes are intended to simplify procedures, enhance clarity, and adapt to evolving market conditions.
**2. Structure and Main Provisions:**
This regulation modifies two key delegated regulations:
* **Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/232:** This regulation is amended to include a requirement for Member States to notify the specific economic areas where extended rules apply in the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors.
* **Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/891:** This regulation sees more extensive changes:
* **Producer Organizations:** The definitions of transnational producer organizations are aligned with those in Regulation 2016/232. It clarifies that producer organizations can process products intended solely for processing themselves or through subsidiaries.
* **Value of Marketed Production:** Updates the legal references for calculating the value of marketed production to align with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/126. It also introduces a derogation for calculating the value of marketed production in cases of significant production decreases due to extreme events.
* **Mergers:** Simplifies the process for assigning identification numbers to producer organizations resulting from mergers.
* **Notification of Producer Prices:** Specifies the types, varieties, and packaging formats for which producer prices must be notified. It aligns the methodology for price collection with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1185.
* **Operational Programmes:** Clarifies which payments can be suspended or recovered if producer organizations fail to meet recognition criteria.
* **Extension of Rules:** Specifies that organic production should be considered if the extension of rules expressly applies to organic producers.
* **Import Mechanisms:** Modifies the rules for notifying prices and quantities of imported fruit and vegetables, including the frequency of notifications (weekly) and the definition of a “market week.” It also updates the Combined Nomenclature codes in Annex VII for the entry price system.
* **Guarantee for Customs Value:** Clarifies the periods when importers must provide a guarantee if the customs value of imported products exceeds the flat-rate calculated by the Commission.
**3. Main Provisions for Practical Use:**
* **Derogation for Extreme Events (Article 2(4)):** Producer organizations can benefit from a derogation in calculating the value of their marketed production if they experience a significant decrease (35% or more) due to natural disasters, climatic events, plant diseases, or pest infestations. This provision aims to provide stability for producer organizations facing unforeseen challenges.
* **Notification of Producer Prices (Article 2(9)):** Member States must adhere to specific guidelines for notifying producer prices, including the types, varieties, and packaging formats outlined in Annex VI. They must also notify the methodology used for establishing these prices.
* **Import Price and Quantity Notifications (Article 2(14)):** Member States are required to notify the Commission weekly on the prices and quantities of imported products, following the updated procedures and definitions, including the new definition of “market week”.
* **Guarantee for Customs Value (Article 2(15)):** Importers need to be aware of the conditions under which they must provide a guarantee if the customs value of their products differs significantly from the standard import value calculated by the Commission, particularly during the periods specified in Annex VII.
* **Updated Product Codes (Article 2(16)):** Economic operators involved in the import of fruit and vegetables should take note of the updated CN codes in Annex VII, as these determine the scope of the entry price system.
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 EU law with the revised thresholds established in the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Government Procurement.
The regulation is structured simply, containing two articles. Article 1 amends Article 8 of Directive 2009/81/EC by adjusting the threshold amounts for contracts. Article 2 specifies the date of entry into force and the date of application, ensuring that the changes take effect from 1 January 2026. The main change involves the reduction of the threshold in point (a) from EUR 443,000 to EUR 432,000 and the reduction of the threshold in point (b) from EUR 5,538,000 to EUR 5,404,000.
The most important provision is Article 1, which directly modifies the financial thresholds that trigger the application of Directive 2009/81/EC. Any contracting authority or entity involved in defense and security procurement needs to be aware of these new thresholds, as they determine which contracts are subject to the Directive’s procedural requirements.
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 timeline for these incentives with the CO2 emission reduction targets set for heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers, ensuring a coherent approach to promoting sustainable transportation.
The directive amends Article 7ga(1) of Directive 1999/62/EC, specifically extending the deadline from December 31, 2025, to June 30, 2031, for Member States to apply reduced rates or exemptions for zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles. It also updates the corresponding date after which these incentives will no longer be applicable, changing it from January 1, 2026, to July 1, 2031. The directive requires Member States to inform the Commission if they choose to implement these extended incentives.
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 economically attractive and supporting the broader deployment of sustainable transportation solutions.
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 allow for the possible retroactive imposition of anti-dumping duties on these imports, should the ongoing investigation determine that such measures are warranted. The regulation does not impose duties but sets up a mechanism to track imports in case duties are later deemed necessary.
The regulation consists of a preamble outlining 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, detailing the product characteristics and relevant CN and TARIC codes. It also specifies that the registration will 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 its binding and directly applicable nature in all Member States. There are no previous versions of this regulation to compare it with, as it is a new implementing act.
The most important provision is Article 1, which clearly defines the products subject to registration and specifies the countries of origin. This definition is crucial for importers and customs authorities to determine whether their goods fall under the scope of this regulation. The expiry date of the registration, also mentioned in Article 1, is important as it sets the period during which imports are monitored for potential anti-dumping duties.
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 for certain products, adjusting the application of additional import duties, and removing outdated provisions concerning operational programs of producer organizations. These amendments aim to reduce administrative burdens and align the regulations with current trade practices and the EU Tariff Schedule of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.
The regulation consists of two articles and an 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 (now to be fixed weekly), and revising Articles 39, 40, and 41 concerning additional import duties. The amendments also include replacing Annex VII, which lists the products and periods for applying additional import duties. Article 2 specifies that the regulation will enter into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and confirms its binding and directly applicable nature in all Member States.
The most important provisions for practical use are those concerning the calculation of standard import values and the application of additional import duties. The standard import values will now be fixed weekly, which should provide more up-to-date and accurate reflections of market prices. The revised Annex VII is also crucial, as it specifies the exact products (identified by CN codes) and periods during which additional import duties may be applied, helping businesses to understand when these duties might affect their imports.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1952 of 29 September 2025 on measures to prevent the establishment and the spread within the Union territory of Anoplophora glabripennis (Motschulsky) and for the eradication and containment of that pest within certain demarcated areas and repealing Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/893
This is a description of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1952.
**Essence of the Act:**
This regulation outlines measures to prevent the establishment and spread of the Asian longhorned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis) within the EU. It details actions for eradicating the pest where it’s found and containing it in areas where eradication is no longer feasible. The regulation also repeals and replaces Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/893, updating the approach to managing this plant pest.
**Structure and Main Provisions:**
The regulation is structured into five chapters:
* **Chapter I** defines the subject matter and key terms like “specified pest,” “specified plants,” “host plants,” “specified wood and wood packaging material,” “sentinel plants,” and “demarcated area for containment.”
* **Chapter II** focuses on annual surveys outside demarcated areas and the creation of contingency plans. It requires risk-based annual surveys of host plants in areas where the pest is not known to occur, using methods capable of detecting infestation at crown height. It also details the elements that Member States must include in their contingency plans, such as eradication measures, resource allocation, and procedures for identifying property owners.
* **Chapter III** addresses the establishment, derogation, and abolition of demarcated areas. It sets out the conditions under which Member States must establish demarcated areas, including infested zones and buffer zones. It also allows for derogations from establishing demarcated areas under specific conditions, such as isolated findings or evidence that the pest was introduced with infested material.
* **Chapter IV** outlines eradication and containment measures. It details the specific actions to be taken in demarcated areas to eradicate the pest, including felling infested plants, removing roots, and prohibiting movement of potentially infested material. For areas where eradication is not possible, it specifies containment measures, such as felling infested plants and restricting the introduction of new host plants.
* **Chapter V** includes final provisions, such as reporting obligations for Member States and the repeal of Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/893.
Compared to Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/893, this regulation provides updated and more detailed measures for surveys, eradication, and containment of Anoplophora glabripennis. It incorporates scientific advice from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and adapts to the most recent scientific and technical evidence.
**Main Provisions for Practical Use:**
* **Annual Surveys:** Competent authorities must conduct risk-based annual surveys of host plants outside demarcated areas, using techniques capable of detecting infestation at crown height.
* **Demarcated Areas:** When the pest is officially confirmed, Member States must establish a demarcated area consisting of an infested zone and a buffer zone. The regulation specifies the minimum width of the buffer zone and conditions for reducing its size.
* **Eradication and Containment Measures:** The regulation details specific measures for eradicating the pest in demarcated areas, including felling infested plants, removing roots, and prohibiting movement of potentially infested material. For areas where eradication is not possible, it specifies containment measures.
* **Reporting Obligations:** Member States must submit annual reports to the Commission and other Member States on the measures taken and the results of those measures.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1953 of 29 September 2025 amending Annexes VII, VIII, XI and XIII to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 as regards measures against the entry into, and the presence in the Union territory of Anoplophora glabripennis (Motschulsky) and Anoplophora chinensis (Forster)
This Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1953 amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 to update protective measures against the introduction and spread of *Anoplophora glabripennis* (Asian longhorned beetle) and *Anoplophora chinensis* (citrus longhorned beetle) within the Union territory. These beetles are pests that can severely damage trees. The regulation adjusts requirements for plants, plant products, and wood originating from third countries or moving within the EU to mitigate the risk posed by these pests.
The regulation modifies Annexes VII, VIII, XI, and XIII of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072. These annexes list specific plants, plant products, and other objects subject to phytosanitary measures. The amendments include adding new entries related to *Anoplophora glabripennis* and *Anoplophora chinensis*, modifying the scope of host plants, and adjusting requirements for inspections and sampling. It incorporates measures previously established in Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2095 and Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/893, updating them for consistency and legal certainty.
Key provisions of the regulation include:
* **Specific Requirements for Plants and Wood:** The regulation introduces specific requirements for the import and movement of certain plants (e.g., *Acer, Aesculus, Betula, Fraxinus*) and wood from countries where *Anoplophora glabripennis* is present. These requirements include originating from pest-free areas or undergoing specific treatments like heat treatment.
* **Host Plant Scope Adjustment:** The scope of host plants for *Anoplophora chinensis* is broadened to include all *Aesculus* species, while the scope for *Anoplophora glabripennis* is narrowed to species where the pest has been found.
* **Sampling Requirements:** The regulation removes disproportionately high destructive sampling levels, requiring instead that sampling schemes can detect a 1% infestation level with 99% confidence.
* **Movement within Demarcated Areas:** Specific rules are set for moving plants and wood originating from or introduced into demarcated areas established for pest containment within the Union.
* **Phytosanitary Certificates and Plant Passports:** The regulation specifies when phytosanitary certificates and plant passports are needed for certain wood types moving within the Union.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2444 of 2 December 2025 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2058 as regards the special rate of official controls for the entry into Northern Ireland from other parts of the United Kingdom of consignments of certain retail goods
This Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2444 amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2058, adjusting the frequency of identity checks on certain retail goods entering Northern Ireland from other parts of the United Kingdom. The key change involves reducing the rate of identity checks performed at Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Inspection Facilities for these goods. This adjustment is based on the consistent compliance with marking requirements for milk and dairy products, as reported by authorities.
The regulation consists of two articles. Article 1 amends Article 3(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2058, replacing the original text with a new provision that lowers the frequency rate of identity checks from 10% to 8% for consignments of retail goods entering Northern Ireland from other parts of the UK, provided they meet specific pre-packing and marking requirements as outlined in Regulation (EU) 2023/1231. Article 2 stipulates that the regulation will enter into force the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
The most important provision is the reduction of identity checks to 8% on retail goods entering Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK. This change is contingent upon compliance with the marking requirements for milk and dairy products, specifically those detailed in Article 6(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2023/1231. This adjustment aims to streamline the inspection process while ensuring continued adherence to established standards for goods entering Northern Ireland.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2461 of 29 September 2025 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2095 as regards measures to prevent the introduction into, establishment and spread within the Union territory of Anoplophora chinensis (Forster)
This Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2461 amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2095, which establishes measures to prevent the introduction, establishment, and spread of Anoplophora chinensis (Forster), a plant pest, within the European Union. The amendment addresses the pest’s establishment in certain Italian areas where eradication is no longer feasible, updates the list of host plants to include the entire Aesculus genus, and refines survey requirements for areas where the pest’s presence is uncertain. It also adjusts the confidence levels required for surveys around production sites within demarcated areas.
The Regulation modifies several articles of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2095. It redefines “specified plants” and “host plants” to include the entire Aesculus genus, introduces the term “demarcated area for containment,” and replaces Annex II with an updated list of demarcated areas for containment in Italy. It also adjusts the conditions under which intensive surveillance can be waived and increases the confidence level required for surveys around host plant production sites within buffer zones. Articles 10, 11, and 12 of the original regulation are deleted.
The most important provisions for practical use are the updated definitions of “specified plants” and “host plants,” which now include the entire Aesculus genus, and the increased confidence level required for surveys around host plant production sites within buffer zones (99% confidence level within 1 km). The introduction of “demarcated areas for containment” and the updated list in Annex II also have significant implications for pest management in Italy.
Regulation (EU) 2025/2439 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2025 amending Regulation (EU) 2024/2865 as regards dates of application and transitional provisions (Text with EEA relevance)
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 3 December 2025.Nokia Oyj v European Union Intellectual Property Office.EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark NOOKA YOUR SPACE – Earlier EU word mark NOKIA – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.Case T-617/24.
Arrêt du Tribunal (quatrième chambre) du 3 décembre 2025.#UC contre Conseil de l’Union européenne.#Politique étrangère et de sécurité commune – Mesures restrictives prises en raison de la situation en République démocratique du Congo – Gel des fonds – Restrictions en matière d’admission sur le territoire des États membres – Listes des personnes, des entités et des organismes auxquels s’applique le gel des fonds et des ressources économiques et faisant l’objet de restrictions en matière d’admission sur le territoire des États membres – Maintien du nom du requérant sur les listes – Recours en annulation – Compétence du Conseil – Obligation de transparence – Sécurité juridique – Obligation de motivation – Erreur d’appréciation – Droits fondamentaux – Proportionnalité.#Affaire T-72/24.
Judgment of the General Court (Chamber giving preliminary rulings) of 3 December 2025.MS KLJUČAROVCI, d. o. o. – v stečaju v Republic of Slovenia.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Harmonisation of fiscal legislation – Common system of VAT – Articles 41 and 42 of Directive 2006/112/EC – Place of an intra-Community acquisition of goods – Article 141(c) of Directive 2006/112 – Triangular transaction – Simplification measure – Chain of supplies comprising four operators identified in three different Member States – Taxable person who is or should have been aware of transactions constituting an abuse of the VAT system.Case T-646/24.
Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 December 2025.AlzChem Trostberg GmbH v European Commission.Public health – Biocidal products – Decision not approving cyanamide as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 3 and 18 – Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 – Transitional measures – Manifest error of assessment – Proportionality.Case T-536/23.
Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 3 December 2025.WS v European Commission.Processing of personal data – Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies – Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 – Requests made to EPSO concerning access to and processing of personal data – Error of law.Case T-318/24.
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 3 December 2025.Mute Sp. z o.o. v European Union Intellectual Property Office.EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark mute labs – Earlier EU figurative mark MuteDesign – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001.Case T-49/25.
Arrêt du Tribunal (première chambre) du 3 décembre 2025.#Elena Petrovna Timchenko contre Conseil de l’Union européenne.#Politique étrangère et de sécurité commune – Mesures restrictives prises eu égard aux actions compromettant ou menaçant l’intégrité territoriale, la souveraineté et l’indépendance de l’Ukraine – Gel des fonds – Liste des personnes, des entités et des organismes auxquels s’applique le gel des fonds et des ressources économiques – Restrictions en matière d’admission sur le territoire des États membres – Liste des personnes, des entités et des organismes faisant l’objet de restrictions en matière d’admission sur le territoire des États membres – Maintien du nom du requérant sur les listes – Notion d’“association” – Article 2, paragraphe 1, in fine, de la décision 2014/145/PESC – Obligation de motivation – Erreur d’appréciation – Droit d’être entendu – Citoyenneté de l’Union – Liberté de circulation – Droit de propriété – Proportionnalité – Responsabilité non contractuelle.#Affaire T-1107/23.
This is a judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of December 3, 2025, in Case T-1107/23, Elena Petrovna Timchenko v. Council of the European Union.
**Essence of the Act:**
The judgment concerns restrictive measures (sanctions) imposed by the EU against individuals and entities in response to actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and independence of Ukraine. The applicant, Elena Timchenko, challenged the Council’s decision to maintain her name on the lists of individuals subject to asset freezes and restrictions on admission to EU member states. The General Court dismissed her application.
**Structure and Main Provisions:**
The judgment addresses the applicant’s claims for the annulment of Council Decisions (PESC) 2023/1767 and 2024/847, as well as Council Implementing Regulations (EU) 2023/1765 and 2024/849, which prolonged the restrictive measures against her. She also sought compensation for the moral prejudice allegedly suffered due to these measures.
The judgment is structured as follows:
* **Background:** It outlines the initial listing of the applicant and the subsequent decisions to maintain her name on the sanctions lists.
* **Subject Matter of the Dispute:** It describes the specific acts (decisions and regulations) that the applicant is challenging.
* **Arguments of the Parties:** It summarizes the applicant’s arguments for annulment and compensation, as well as the Council’s and the European Commission’s counter-arguments.
* **Legal Analysis:** The Court examines the applicant’s claims, focusing on:
* Whether the Council violated her right to effective judicial protection and its obligation to state reasons for its decisions.
* Whether her right to be heard was respected.
* Whether the Council made an error in its assessment of the facts.
* Whether her fundamental rights as an EU citizen were violated (freedom of movement).
* Whether her property rights and right to private and family life were violated.
* Whether the principle of proportionality was respected.
* **Decision:** The Court rejects all of the applicant’s claims and dismisses the action in its entirety.
**Main Provisions and Changes:**
The key provision at stake is the Council’s justification for maintaining the applicant on the sanctions lists, specifically the criteria for being considered “associated with” individuals already subject to sanctions. The Council argued that Ms. Timchenko was associated with her husband, Gennady Timchenko, who was already sanctioned for his close ties to President Putin and his involvement in actions undermining Ukraine’s integrity.
The judgment clarifies the interpretation of the “associated with” criterion. The Court found that the Council had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Ms. Timchenko was associated with her husband through their joint involvement in business activities, property ownership, and philanthropic foundations, particularly the Timchenko Foundation. The Court emphasized that the concept of “association” can be interpreted as any physical or legal person who has a connection, going beyond a family relationship, with a person who is subject to restrictive measures.
**Most Important Provisions for Use:**
The most important aspects of this judgment are:
* **Interpretation of “Associated With”:** The Court’s interpretation of this criterion provides guidance on how the EU applies sanctions to individuals connected to those directly involved in actions against Ukraine.
* **Burden of Proof:** The judgment reiterates that the Council bears the burden of proving the grounds for maintaining a person on the sanctions list, but it also acknowledges the difficulties in obtaining evidence in the context of the conflict in Ukraine.
* **Fundamental Rights:** The Court reaffirms that fundamental rights are not absolute and can be restricted in pursuit of legitimate objectives of general interest, such as the EU’s foreign policy goals.
* **Proportionality:** The judgment underscores the importance of proportionality in the application of sanctions, ensuring that the measures are appropriate and necessary to achieve the intended objectives.
**** This judgment is relevant to Ukraine because it concerns the EU’s sanctions regime imposed in response to actions undermining Ukraine’s territorial integrity, sovereignty, and independence. It affects individuals and entities associated with those actions, including family members of sanctioned individuals.
Arrêt du Tribunal (première chambre) du 3 décembre 2025.#Gennady Nikolayevich Timchenko contre Conseil de l’Union européenne.#Politique étrangère et de sécurité commune – Mesures restrictives prises eu égard aux actions compromettant ou menaçant l’intégrité territoriale, la souveraineté et l’indépendance de l’Ukraine – Gel des fonds – Liste des personnes, des entités et des organismes auxquels s’applique le gel des fonds et des ressources économiques – Restrictions en matière d’admission sur le territoire des États membres – Liste des personnes, des entités et des organismes faisant l’objet de restrictions en matière d’admission sur le territoire des États membres – Maintien du nom du requérant sur les listes – Obligation de motivation – Erreur d’appréciation – Droit d’être entendu – Citoyenneté de l’Union – Liberté de circulation – Droit de propriété – Proportionnalité – Responsabilité non contractuelle.#Affaire T-285/24.
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) establishes the applicable interest rates for the recovery of unlawful state aid and the reference/discount rates for EFTA States, effective from 1 September 2025. These rates are crucial for ensuring fair competition within the European Economic Area (EEA) by neutralizing the financial advantage gained by companies that have received illegal state support.
The notice is structured simply, presenting a table of base rates for Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway. These base rates are calculated according to the methodology outlined in ESA’s State Aid Guidelines, as amended by Decision No 788/08/COL. The applicable reference rates are then derived by adding appropriate margins to these base rates, in accordance with the same State Aid Guidelines. This notice updates the applicable rates from previous periods.
The most important aspect of this notice is the specific base rates provided for each EFTA State. These rates are the foundation for calculating the actual interest rates used in state aid recovery and for determining the discount rates applied in certain state aid schemes. Businesses, legal professionals, and national authorities in Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway must use these rates to ensure compliance with EEA 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 v Norwegian State. The District Court seeks clarification on whether certain decisions related to a new hospital structure fall within the scope of the SEA Directive and whether national rules on procedural errors can be applied when there is alleged non-compliance with the SEA Directive. The request essentially asks the EFTA Court to provide guidance on the scope and application of the SEA Directive in the context of Norwegian law.
The document is structured as follows:
* **Introduction:** Briefly introduces the request for an Advisory Opinion and identifies the parties involved.
* **Background:** Outlines the disagreement between the parties regarding the applicability of the SEA Directive’s environmental impact assessment requirements.
* **Questions:** Presents two main questions for the EFTA Court’s consideration:
* **Question 1:** Concerns the scope of the SEA Directive and whether it applies to specific decisions, including zoning plans, a health enterprise’s decision on a target image for a new hospital structure, and a parliamentary loan limit decision. It also seeks guidance on how the conditions for falling within the scope of the SEA Directive should be construed, particularly in relation to assessments under the EIA Directive.
* **Question 2:** Addresses the compatibility of a national rule (section 41 of the Norwegian Public Administration Act) with EEA law, specifically Article 3 of the EEA Agreement (duty of loyalty). This rule allows a decision to be upheld despite a procedural error if the error could not have affected the substance of the decision, even in cases of alleged non-compliance with the SEA Directive.
* **Specific Questions:** Elaborates on the two main questions with more detailed sub-questions to guide the EFTA Court’s assessment.
The main provisions of the act are the questions that the Oslo District Court poses to the EFTA Court. These questions seek clarification on the interpretation and application of the SEA Directive in the context of specific decisions related to a hospital development project in Norway. The request does not refer to previous versions of the act, as it is a request for interpretation rather than an amendment of existing legislation.
The most important provisions for its use are the specific questions posed to the EFTA Court, as these questions define the scope of the legal issues under consideration. These questions will guide the EFTA Court’s analysis and ultimately shape the Advisory Opinion provided to the Oslo District Court. The answers to these questions will have significant implications for the application of the SEA Directive in Norway and potentially in other EFTA countries.
