[:uk]Review of the EU legislation for 18/10/2024[:]

[:uk]

Overview of Recent Commission Regulations and EEA Joint Committee Decisions

Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/2706

This regulation establishes a fisheries closure for Norway lobster in specific marine areas (8a, 8b, 8d, and 8e) for Belgian vessels, effective from October 1, 2024. It addresses the exhaustion of the allocated fishing quota for Norway lobster for 2024, as previously determined by the Council Regulation. The provisions include prohibitions on fishing, transshipping, and processing in designated areas, while allowing for the retention and reporting of unintended catches.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2694

This regulation authorizes magnesium L-threonate as a novel food for market placement within the EU. The regulation outlines exclusive marketing rights granted to AIDP Inc. for five years, following a positive safety assessment from the European Food Safety Authority. It also details labeling requirements for products containing magnesium L-threonate and updates the Union list of novel foods.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2686

This regulation initiates an investigation into potential circumvention of anti-dumping measures on certain graphite electrode systems imported from China. It requires customs authorities to register imports and establishes deadlines for interested parties to submit their views and information. The investigation aims to assess if imports of artificial graphite are undermining existing anti-dumping duties.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2692

This regulation amends existing provisions related to the approval or withdrawal of disease-free status for certain Member States or zones concerning specific diseases. It includes updates to the epidemiological situation of diseases like bluetongue virus and details eradication programs approved in certain regions.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690

This regulation lays down rules for applying cybersecurity risk-management measures for various digital service providers, including DNS services and online platforms. It specifies requirements for risk assessments, incident handling, and supply chain security to enhance the cybersecurity posture of these entities.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2682

This regulation amends specifications for vitamin D2 mushroom powder, expanding the range of authorized concentrations and revising carbohydrate limits, while maintaining production process consistency. It reflects the Commission’s commitment to ensuring safe and effective novel food products within the EU market.

Judgment of the Court (C-112/23 P)

This judgment involves an appeal concerning the imposition of countervailing duties on biodiesel imports from Indonesia. The Court upheld the General Court’s findings regarding the presence of subsidies and the injury caused to the EU industry, reaffirming the Commission’s discretion in evaluating economic factors related to trade defense measures.

Judgment of the Court (C-461/23)

This ruling addresses the compatibility of a decree designating a Natura 2000 site with environmental assessment requirements. The Court clarified that such designations are not considered ‘plans or programmes’ requiring assessments under EU legislation, emphasizing conservation objectives.

Judgment of the Court (C-408/23)

The Court ruled on age discrimination in employment, specifically regarding an upper age limit for notaries. It found that such limits can be justified if they serve legitimate objectives and are necessary, aligning with EU anti-discrimination laws.

Judgment of the Court (C-159/23)

This judgment clarifies copyright protections for computer programs. The Court ruled that alterations to variable data in RAM do not infringe copyright, emphasizing the distinction between protected expressions and underlying ideas.

Judgment of the Court (C-16/23)

The Court ruled on national legislation concerning tobacco sales, finding that conditions set by Member States regarding the establishment of points of sale can be justified if they serve public health interests, provided they are proportionate.

EEA Joint Committee Decisions Overview

Decision No 164/2024

This decision amends the EEA Agreement to incorporate regulations on maximum nicotine residue levels, ensuring compliance with EU safety standards.

Decision No 168/2024

This decision recognizes the equivalence of financial markets in Australia, updating the EEA Agreement to reflect recent developments in the financial sector.

Decision No 160/2024

This decision introduces amendments regarding technical regulations and standards related to food safety, incorporating new EU regulations into the EEA framework.

Decision No 174/2024

This decision amends the EEA Agreement to incorporate updated environmental monitoring standards, reflecting EU regulations aimed at improving environmental governance.

Decision No 176/2024

This decision incorporates new emissions standards for passenger cars, aligning the EEA with EU regulations on vehicle emissions.

Decision No 181/2024

This decision enhances cooperation in health security by incorporating new EU regulations concerning serious health threats into the EEA framework.

Decision No 179/2024

This decision incorporates a framework for managing serious health threats into the EEA Agreement, promoting collaboration among member states in public health efforts.

Decision No 170/2024

This decision updates the EEA Agreement regarding cross-border payments, enhancing the efficiency and transparency of financial transactions within the EEA.

Decision No 157/2024

This decision introduces new regulations concerning food additives, ensuring compliance with updated EU standards in the EEA.

Decision No 172/2024

This decision incorporates amendments to regulations governing air operations, thereby enhancing compliance with technical requirements within the EEA.

Decision No 156/2024

This decision updates the EEA Agreement regarding food additives, ensuring member states adhere to the latest regulations while acknowledging specific exemptions for Liechtenstein.

Decision No 149/2024

Review of each of legal acts published today:

Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/2706 of 12 October 2024 establishing a fisheries closure for Norway lobster in areas 8a, 8b, 8d and 8e for vessels flying the flag of Belgium

Overview of Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/2706

Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/2706, adopted on 12 October 2024, establishes a fisheries closure for Norway lobster in specific marine areas (8a, 8b, 8d, and 8e) for vessels flying the flag of Belgium. This regulation is a response to the exhaustion of the allocated fishing quota for Norway lobster for the year 2024, as determined by Council Regulation (EU) 2024/257.

Key Provisions

Article 1: Quota Exhaustion

This article states that the fishing quota allocated to Belgium for Norway lobster in the specified areas is considered exhausted as of the date specified in the Annex of the regulation.

Article 2: Prohibitions

• Prohibition of Fishing: It is prohibited for vessels registered in Belgium to fish for Norway lobster in the designated areas from the date set in the Annex. This includes searching for, shooting, setting, or hauling fishing gear targeting this stock.
• Transshipping and Processing: Activities such as transshipping, retaining on board, processing, transferring, caging, and landing of Norway lobster caught prior to the closure date are permitted.
• Unintended Catches: Any unintended catches of Norway lobster must be retained on board, recorded, and counted against the quotas as per Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Article 3: Entry into Force

This regulation will come into force the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, making it immediately applicable to all Member States.

Annex Details

The Annex specifies the details of the closure:

• Member State: Belgium
• Stock: NEP/8ABDE (Norway lobster)
• Zone: Areas 8a, 8b, 8d, and 8e
• Closing Date: 1 October 2024

This regulation represents a critical measure to ensure the sustainability of Norway lobster stocks in the specified areas, reflecting the EU’s commitment to responsible fisheries management.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2694 of 17 October 2024 authorising the placing on the market of magnesium L-threonate as a novel food and amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470

Analysis of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2694

The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2694, adopted on 17 October 2024, authorizes the placing on the market of magnesium L-threonate as a novel food and amends Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470. This regulation is significant as it establishes magnesium L-threonate as a recognized source of magnesium in food supplements intended for adults, excluding pregnant and lactating women.

Key Provisions

Authorization and Conditions

Article 1 of the regulation states that magnesium L-threonate is authorized for market placement within the European Union. The novel food will be included in the Union list of novel foods, which is updated through amendments to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470.

Data Protection

Article 2 grants exclusive authorization to AIDP Inc. to market magnesium L-threonate for a duration of five years from 7 November 2024. During this period, no other company can use the proprietary scientific data submitted by AIDP Inc. without their agreement. Article 3 ensures that the scientific data provided by the applicant, which supports the safety and bioavailability of magnesium L-threonate, remains protected for five years from the regulation’s entry into force.

Safety Assessment

The regulation references the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) scientific opinion, adopted on 30 January 2024, which concluded that magnesium L-threonate is safe for use and provides bioavailable magnesium. This assessment was based on a series of studies, including bioavailability studies in rats, various toxicity tests, and a randomized human study.

Labelling Requirements

Article 14 specifies that the labelling of food supplements containing magnesium L-threonate must include clear indications regarding its intended use. It must state that the supplements are intended for adults only and should exclude pregnant and lactating women. The regulation also mandates that the proper designation of the novel food on labels must be “Magnesium L-threonate.”

Annex Amendments

The regulation amends the Annex of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 to include detailed specifications of magnesium L-threonate, such as its chemical identity, purity criteria, microbiological criteria, and acceptable limits for various substances. This ensures that the product meets specific safety and quality standards before it can be marketed.

Conclusion

Overall, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2694 outlines the framework for the introduction of magnesium L-threonate as a novel food within the EU. It emphasizes the importance of safety assessments, data protection for proprietary studies, and clear labelling to inform consumers about the product’s intended use.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2686 of 17 October 2024 initiating an investigation concerning possible circumvention of the anti-dumping measures imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/558 on imports of certain graphite electrode systems originating in the People’s Republic of China by imports of artificial graphite in blocks or cylinders originating in the People’s Republic of China and making such imports subject to registration

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2686

Adopted on 17 October 2024, this regulation initiates an investigation into potential circumvention of existing anti-dumping measures on certain graphite electrode systems imported from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The focus is on imports of artificial graphite in blocks or cylinders, aiming to determine if these imports undermine the current anti-dumping duties.

Article 1: Initiation of Investigation

An investigation is launched under Article 13(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 to assess whether imports of artificial graphite in specific forms from the PRC are circumventing the anti-dumping measures established by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/558.

Article 2: Registration of Imports

1. The customs authorities of Member States are required to register imports identified under Article 1.
2. This registration will remain valid for nine months from the regulation’s entry into force.

Article 3: Time-Limits and Submissions

1. Interested parties must notify the Commission within 15 days of the regulation’s entry into force.
2. To have their views considered, parties must submit written statements, questionnaires, exemption requests, or other relevant information within 37 days of the regulation’s publication in the Official Journal.
3. Requests to be heard by the Commission must also be made within these timeframes, specifying the reasons for the hearing.

Article 4: Entry into Force

The regulation becomes effective the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. It is fully binding and directly applicable across all Member States.

Request Details

The European Commission received a request on 4 September 2024 from the European Carbon and Graphite Association (ECGA) to investigate the circumvention of anti-dumping measures on graphite electrode systems by importing artificial graphite in blocks or cylinders from the PRC.

Product Definitions

• Product Concerned: Graphite electrodes used in electric furnaces with specific density and resistivity, classified under CN code ex 8545 11 00 and TARIC codes 8545 11 00 10 and 8545 11 00 15.
• Product Under Investigation: Artificial graphite in blocks or cylinders meeting certain density and resistivity criteria, classified under CN codes ex 3801 10 00 and ex 3801 90 00 and TARIC codes 3801 10 00 15 and 3801 90 00 80.

Existing Measures

The regulation references existing anti-dumping measures imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/558, which target imports of certain graphite electrode systems from the PRC.

Grounds for Investigation

• Evidence suggests that imports of the product under investigation are replacing the product subject to anti-dumping measures.
• The shift in import patterns indicates possible circumvention through assembly or completion operations within the Union.
• These operations have significantly increased, constituting circumvention as they involve substantial parts from the PRC and minimal value addition within the Union.
• The circumvention practices are undermining the remedial effects of existing measures by increasing import volumes and lowering prices of like products.
• Prices of the assembled/completed products are found to be dumped relative to the normal value established for the product concerned.

Additionally, if other circumvention practices are identified during the investigation, they may also be covered under this regulation.

Procedure

Information Submission

• Interested parties must submit information via TRON.tdi within the specified deadlines.
• Submissions involving copyrighted material require explicit permission for use and sharing by the Commission.
• Confidential information must be labeled ‘Sensitive’ and accompanied by non-confidential summaries.
• Failure to provide necessary information may result in the Commission using facts available.

Collection of Information and Hearings

• All interested parties, including Union industry and importers, are invited to submit their views and evidence within the given timeframe.
• The Commission may conduct hearings if requested in writing with justified reasons.

Exemptions

• Under Article 13(4), imports of the product under investigation may be exempted if they do not constitute circumvention.
• Producers and importers wishing to obtain exemptions must apply within the stipulated deadlines using the provided forms.

Registration

Imports of the product under investigation are subject to registration to ensure that, if circumvention is confirmed, appropriate anti-dumping duties can be applied retroactively from the date of registration.

Time-Limits

The regulation sets specific deadlines for various procedural rights, including submissions, exemption requests, and hearing requests, all of which must be adhered to to ensure participation in the investigation.

Non-Cooperation

• If parties do not provide necessary information or impede the investigation, the Commission may rely on available facts to reach its findings.
• Supplying false or misleading information will lead to its disregard, and reliance on available facts.
• Partial cooperation may result in less favorable outcomes for the non-cooperating parties.

Schedule of the Investigation

The investigation is set to conclude within nine months from the regulation’s entry into force.

Processing of Personal Data

Personal data collected during the investigation will be processed in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, ensuring the protection of individuals’ data.

Hearing Officer

• Interested parties can request the intervention of a Hearing Officer for various procedural matters, including access to files and confidentiality disputes.
• The Hearing Officer can organize hearings and mediate to ensure the protection of the parties’ rights of defense.
• Requests must be timely and well-justified to be considered.

Final Provisions

• The regulation is binding and directly applicable in all Member States.
• It enters into force the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
• The President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, officially adopts the regulation.

References

• Regulation (EU) 2016/1036: Link
• Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/558: Link
• Regulation (EU) 2018/1725: Link
• Trade Defence Case Correspondence Guidelines: Link
• TRON.tdi Platform: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/tron/tdi
• Hearing Officer Information: Link

Contact Information

European Commission
Directorate-General for Trade
Directorate G
Office: CHAR 04/039
1049 Bruxelles/Brussel
BELGIQUE/BELGIË
TRON.tdi: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/tron/tdi
Email: [email protected]
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2692 of 17 October 2024 amending Annexes I and VIII to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/620 as regards the approval or withdrawal of the disease-free status of certain Member States or zones thereof as regards certain listed diseases and the approval of eradication programmes for certain listed diseases

Analysis of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2692

The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2692, adopted on 17 October 2024, amends Annexes I and VIII to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/620. This regulation specifically addresses the approval or withdrawal of the disease-free status of certain Member States or zones regarding specific listed diseases, as well as the approval of eradication programs for those diseases.

Key Provisions:

• Background Regulations: The regulation operates under the framework established by Regulation (EU) 2016/429, also known as the Animal Health Law, which sets out disease-specific rules and procedures for managing transmissible animal diseases.
• Withdrawal of Disease-Free Status:
  • Italy has reported a primary outbreak of infection with Brucella species in the province of Alessandria, prompting the withdrawal of the disease-free status for this province.
  • Multiple outbreaks of bluetongue virus (BTV) serotypes were reported in various Member States, including Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Sweden, Italy, and Spain. As a result, the disease-free status for these regions has been withdrawn where outbreaks occurred.
• Amendments to Annexes:
  • Annex I and Annex VIII have been updated to reflect the current epidemiological situation of the listed diseases.
  • Specific entries for affected Member States have been revised to indicate areas that maintain or lose disease-free status.
• Eradication Programs:
  • Spain has extended its optional eradication program for BTV to include additional regions such as the Balearic Islands and a zone in Aragon, which has been officially recognized in the regulation.
• Implementation and Applicability: The regulation is binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States, entering into force three days after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Conclusion:

This regulation reflects the European Commission’s ongoing efforts to manage animal health across the EU by responding to emerging disease outbreaks and ensuring that Member States adhere to the necessary health standards. The amendments made in this regulation highlight the dynamic nature of disease management and the importance of timely updates to health status and eradication efforts.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 of 17 October 2024 laying down rules for the application of Directive (EU) 2022/2555 as regards technical and methodological requirements of cybersecurity risk-management measures and further specification of the cases in which an incident is considered to be significant with regard to DNS service providers, TLD name registries, cloud computing service providers, data centre service providers, content delivery network providers, managed service providers, managed security service providers, providers of online market places, of online search engines and of social networking services platforms, and trust service providers

Overview of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690

The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 lays down essential rules for applying Directive (EU) 2022/2555, focusing on cybersecurity risk-management measures for various digital service providers. The regulation is significant as it outlines technical and methodological requirements aimed at enhancing the cybersecurity posture of entities involved in DNS services, cloud computing, data centers, and online platforms.

Key Provisions

1. Subject Matter

The regulation specifies the technical and methodological requirements for cybersecurity risk management as per Directive (EU) 2022/2555, detailing how incidents are to be classified as significant for a range of service providers.

2. Technical and Methodological Requirements

The regulation outlines requirements that relevant entities must adhere to, ensuring an adequate level of cybersecurity. Entities are required to perform risk assessments and implement measures based on their specific risk profiles and operational contexts.

3. Definition of Significant Incidents

Incidents are categorized as significant based on criteria such as financial loss thresholds, impact on health, or breaches of data integrity. Specific criteria are provided for various types of service providers, ensuring clarity on reporting obligations when incidents occur.

4. Risk Management Framework

Entities must establish and maintain a risk management framework, incorporating policies for risk analysis, incident handling, and business continuity. This includes a detailed incident response plan and a framework for assessing and treating risks.

5. Incident Handling and Reporting

The regulation mandates that entities develop and implement incident handling policies, including procedures for detection, reporting, and recovery from incidents. There are specified timelines for reporting significant incidents to relevant authorities.

6. Cyber Hygiene Practices

Basic cyber hygiene practices are emphasized, requiring entities to train staff on cybersecurity awareness and implement fundamental security measures across their operations.

7. Supply Chain Security

Entities are required to manage risks associated with their supply chains, ensuring that contracts with suppliers include cybersecurity requirements and that suppliers are monitored for compliance.

8. Security in Development and Maintenance

The regulation stresses the importance of secure development practices for ICT services and products, requiring entities to implement security measures throughout the development lifecycle.

9. Asset Management

Entities must maintain an inventory of their assets and apply appropriate security measures based on the classification of those assets, ensuring their protection throughout the asset lifecycle.

10. Training and Awareness

Regular training and awareness programs for employees are mandated to ensure that all personnel understand their roles and responsibilities regarding cybersecurity.

11. Governance and Compliance

Entities are required to establish governance structures for cybersecurity, ensuring that roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and that compliance with the regulation is regularly assessed.

12. Physical and Environmental Security

Measures must be implemented to protect against physical and environmental threats, ensuring that facilities housing network and information systems are secure from unauthorized access and environmental hazards.

Conclusion

The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 is a comprehensive framework aimed at bolstering cybersecurity across the EU by establishing clear requirements and obligations for relevant digital service providers. It aims to create a unified approach to managing cybersecurity risks and enhancing the resilience of critical services against cyber threats.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2682 of 16 October 2024 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 as regards the specifications of the novel food vitamin D2 mushroom powder

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2682

This regulation amends the Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 regarding the specifications of the novel food vitamin D2 mushroom powder, which is relevant for the European Economic Area (EEA).

Key Provisions

1. Authorization of Novel Foods: Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 stipulates that only novel foods that are authorized and included in the Union list may be marketed within the EU.
2. Union List of Novel Foods: Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 established the Union list, which includes vitamin D2 mushroom powder as an authorized novel food.
3. Application for Specification Change: On 29 March 2024, MBio, Monaghan Mushrooms submitted an application to change the specifications of the vitamin D2 mushroom powder, requesting to extend the range of authorized vitamin D2 concentrations to include lower levels and to revise carbohydrate levels.
4. Justification for Changes: The applicant argued that the current vitamin D2 content range (580-595 μg/g) is too narrow. Lower concentrations are necessary for easier incorporation into final products. The proposed range of 137.5-595 μg/g would allow for more accurate vitamin D addition in food applications.
5. Production Process Consistency: The production process remains unchanged, with UV exposure determining vitamin D concentration. Lower concentrations require less UV exposure, ensuring safety and consistency.
6. New Carbohydrate Limits: The applicant proposed a single maximum carbohydrate limit of 60%, replacing the existing separate limits for carbohydrates and total dietary fiber, which would simplify regulatory compliance.
7. Health and Safety Evaluation: The Commission concluded that the proposed specification changes do not affect human health and that a safety evaluation by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is unnecessary, as the changes involve lower vitamin D2 levels and a consolidation of carbohydrate limits.
8. Amendment of the Annex: The regulation amends the Annex of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 to reflect the new specifications for vitamin D2 mushroom powder.
9. Entry into Force: The regulation will enter into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Specifications of Vitamin D2 Mushroom Powder

The following specifications have been established for vitamin D2 mushroom powder:

• Vitamin D2 content: 137-595 μg/g
• Ash: ≤ 13.5%
• Water activity: < 0.5
• Moisture content: ≤ 7.5%
• Total carbohydrates: ≤ 60%
• Crude protein: ≥ 22%
• Fat: ≤ 4.5%

Heavy Metals and Mycotoxins Limits

Limits for heavy metals and mycotoxins are as follows:

• Lead: ≤ 0.5 mg/kg
• Cadmium: ≤ 0.5 mg/kg
• Mercury: ≤ 0.1 mg/kg
• Arsenic: ≤ 0.3 mg/kg
• Aflatoxin B1: ≤ 0.10 μg/kg
• Aflatoxins (total): < 4 μg/kg

Microbiological Criteria

Microbiological standards include:

• Total plate count: ≤ 5,000 CFU
• Total yeast and mould count: < 100 CFU/g
• E. coli: < 10 CFU/g
• Salmonella spp.: Absence in 25 g
• Staphylococcus aureus: ≤ 10 CFU/g
• Coliforms: ≤ 10 CFU/g
• Listeria spp.: Absence in 25 g
• Enterobacteriaceae: < 10 CFU/g

This regulation reflects the European Commission’s ongoing efforts to ensure safe and effective novel food products within the EU market.

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 October 2024.PT Pelita Agung Agrindustri and PT Permata Hijau Palm Oleo v European Commission.Appeal – Subsidies – Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia – Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 – Definitive countervailing duty – Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 – Article 7 – Calculation of the amount of benefit – Article 8(1) and (2) – Price undercutting – Price pressure.Case C-112/23 P.

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) – Case C-112/23 P

The Court of Justice of the European Union delivered a significant judgment on 17 October 2024, concerning the appeal by two Indonesian biodiesel producers, PT Pelita Agung Agrindustri and PT Permata Hijau Palm Oleo, against the General Court’s dismissal of their action against the European Commission’s Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092. This regulation imposed a definitive countervailing duty on imports of biodiesel originating from Indonesia, which the appellants contested.

Legal Context

The primary legislation in question is Regulation (EU) 2016/1037, which outlines the framework for countervailing measures against subsidised imports from non-EU countries. Article 7 details how to calculate the amount of countervailable subsidies, emphasizing that the calculation should be based on the total subsidy allocated per unit of the subsidised product. Article 8 addresses the determination of injury to the EU industry, requiring an objective examination of the volume of subsidised imports and their effect on prices.

Background of the Dispute

The appellants produce biodiesel in Indonesia and export it to the EU. Previous anti-dumping measures had been imposed on them, which were annulled by the General Court in 2016. Following a complaint from the European Biodiesel Board, the Commission initiated an investigation into potential subsidies that might be affecting competition in the EU market. The Commission concluded that the Indonesian government had provided various subsidies to the biodiesel industry, leading to the imposition of an 18% countervailing duty on the appellants.

Arguments and Findings

The appellants raised six grounds of appeal, primarily focusing on alleged errors by the General Court regarding the interpretation of the relevant regulations and the factual basis for the Commission’s findings. They argued that the General Court misapplied the standards for determining price undercutting and failed to consider all relevant data.
The Court reaffirmed the broad discretion of EU institutions in these matters, particularly given the complexity of economic evaluations involved in determining whether subsidised imports cause injury to the domestic industry. The Court found that the General Court had not erred in its assessment of the evidence and the methods used by the Commission to calculate price undercutting.

Specific Findings

The Court upheld the General Court’s finding that the Commission had appropriately analyzed the impact of Indonesian biodiesel on EU prices using three distinct methods of calculation. It concluded that significant price undercutting was evident, which justified the imposition of countervailing duties.
Moreover, the Court rejected the appellants’ claims regarding the allocation of subsidies, affirming that the Commission’s approach to calculating the countervailable subsidy was consistent with the legal framework. The appellants’ arguments about the necessity of adjustments in price comparisons were also dismissed, as the Court found that the Commission’s methodologies were based on objective criteria and were not manifestly incorrect.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the appeal in its entirety, ordering the appellants to bear their own costs and those incurred by the Commission and the European Biodiesel Board. This judgment underscores the EU’s commitment to protecting its market from subsidised imports while providing a clear precedent on the interpretation of relevant trade regulations.

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 October 2024.European Commission v Republic of Malta.Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Article 258 TFEU – Directive 91/271/EEC – Urban waste water treatment – Collecting systems for urban waste water in certain agglomerations – Article 4 – Secondary or equivalent treatment of urban waste water – Article 5 – Sensitive areas – More stringent treatment – Article 10 – Sufficient performance – Article 15 – Monitoring of the conformity of discharges with the requirements of Annex I.B – Control procedures laid down in Annex I.D – Maximum permitted number of samples which fail to conform.Case C-304/23.

Council Directive 91/271/EEC on Urban Waste Water Treatment: Provisions Overview

Article 1: Objective

This Directive addresses the collection, treatment, and discharge of urban waste water, as well as the treatment and discharge of waste water from specific industrial sectors. The primary objective is to protect the environment from the adverse effects resulting from these waste water discharges.

Article 2: Definitions

• Urban Waste Water: Domestic waste water or a mixture of domestic waste water with industrial waste water and/or rain run-off.
• Agglomeration: An area with a sufficient concentration of population and/or economic activities for urban waste water to be collected and directed to a treatment plant or discharge point.
• Collecting System: A network of conduits that collects and conveys urban waste water.
• Population Equivalent (1 p.e.): Represents an organic biodegradable load with a five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of 60 grams of oxygen per day.
• Secondary Treatment: Treatment process generally involving biological treatment with secondary settlement, meeting the requirements specified in Table 1 of Annex I.
• Appropriate Treatment: Any treatment process or disposal system that ensures the receiving waters meet relevant quality objectives and comply with this Directive and other Community Directives.
• Eutrophication: Nutrient enrichment of water, especially nitrogen and phosphorus compounds, leading to excessive growth of algae and plants, disrupting aquatic ecosystems and water quality.

Article 4: Treatment Requirements Before Discharge

Member States must ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems undergoes secondary treatment or equivalent treatment prior to discharge, according to the following deadlines based on the size of the agglomeration:

• By 31 December 2000 for all discharges from agglomerations exceeding 15,000 p.e.
• By 31 December 2005 for all discharges from agglomerations with populations between 10,000 and 15,000 p.e.
• By 31 December 2005 for discharges to fresh water and estuaries from agglomerations with populations between 2,000 and 10,000 p.e.

Additionally, discharges from these treatment plants must comply with the relevant requirements of Annex I.B. The population equivalent load is calculated based on the maximum average weekly load entering the treatment plant during the year, excluding unusual situations such as heavy rainfall.

Article 5: Stringent Treatment in Sensitive Areas

Member States must ensure that urban waste water entering collecting systems is subject to more stringent treatment before discharge into sensitive areas or their catchment areas. The deadlines for achieving this more stringent treatment are:

• By 31 December 1998 for all discharges from agglomerations exceeding 10,000 p.e.

Discharges from these treatment plants must meet the requirements of Annex I.B. Alternatively, in sensitive areas where it’s demonstrated that there’s at least a 75% reduction in total phosphorus and nitrogen loads across all urban waste water treatment plants in the area, individual plant requirements under this Article may not apply. Additionally, discharges from treatment plants located in the catchment areas of sensitive areas must adhere to these stringent treatment requirements.
Areas identified as sensitive must comply with these requirements within seven years of their identification.

Article 10: Performance of Treatment Plants

Member States must ensure that urban waste water treatment plants designed to comply with Articles 4, 5, 6, and 7 are adequately designed, constructed, operated, and maintained to ensure sufficient performance under all normal local climatic conditions. This includes accounting for seasonal variations in waste water load during the design phase.

Article 15: Monitoring and Compliance Verification

Competent authorities or appropriate bodies are required to monitor discharges from urban waste water treatment plants to verify compliance with Annex I.B. This monitoring must adhere to the control procedures specified in Annex I.D. Specifically:

• Monitoring must ensure that discharges meet the quality standards outlined in Annex I.B.
• Control procedures in Annex I.D detail the methods and frequency of sampling and analysis.
• There is a maximum allowed number of samples that may fail to meet the specified requirements within a given monitoring period.

Failure to adhere to these monitoring requirements constitutes a breach of Article 15 and the associated annexes.

Annex I: Requirements for Urban Waste Water

Section B: Discharge Requirements

Details the quality standards that treated urban waste water must meet before being discharged into receiving waters. This includes limits on pollutants such as chemical oxygen demand (COD) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5).

Section D: Reference Methods for Monitoring and Evaluation

Outlines the approved methods for monitoring and evaluating the quality of discharges from urban waste water treatment plants. It specifies sampling frequency, analytical procedures, and criteria for evaluating compliance based on the collected data.

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 October 2024.Umweltforum Osnabrücker Land e. V. v Landkreis Osnabrück.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Directive 2001/42/EC – Assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment – Article 3(2)(b) – Directive 92/43/EEC – Article 6(3) – Acts for which an assessment is required – National legislative act designating a site as a special area of conservation – List of human activities prohibited on that site, with certain exceptions.Case C-461/23.

Judgment Summary: C-461/23 – Umweltforum Osnabrücker Land eV v Landkreis Osnabrück

This judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) addresses the interpretation of two key directives: Directive 2001/42/EC concerning the assessment of environmental effects of certain plans and programmes, and Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora.

Background

The case arose from a request for a preliminary ruling by the Niedersächsisches Oberverwaltungsgericht (Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony, Germany). The dispute involved the legality of a decree by the Landkreis Osnabrück designating a landscape protection area as part of a Natura 2000 site. The decree included a list of human activities prohibited on that site, with certain exceptions.

Key Provisions of the Directives

• Directive 2001/42/EC: Aims to ensure a high level of environmental protection by requiring environmental assessments for plans and programmes likely to have significant effects on the environment.
• Directive 92/43/EEC: Mandates that Member States establish conservation measures for special areas of conservation to avoid the deterioration of natural habitats and species.

Main Legal Questions

The court was asked to clarify whether a legislative act designating a site as a special area of conservation is considered a ‘plan or programme’ under Directive 2001/42 that necessitates an environmental assessment.

Court’s Findings

The CJEU ruled that:

• A legislative act that designates a site as a special area of conservation and lists prohibited human activities, along with exceptions, is not classified as a ‘plan or programme’ requiring an environmental assessment under Directive 2001/42.
• Such acts are considered directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site, and thus exempt from the environmental assessment requirement.
• The court emphasized that while provisions within such an act must be scrutinized for their specific content, the overarching purpose of the designation aligns with the conservation objectives outlined in Directive 92/43.

Conclusion

The court’s judgment clarifies the relationship between the two directives, establishing that the designation of conservation areas and the regulations surrounding them are integral to site management and do not trigger additional environmental assessment requirements. This decision underscores the importance of balancing conservation efforts with regulatory frameworks at the EU level.
Overall, the ruling provides significant guidance on the interpretation of environmental legislation within the EU, particularly concerning the obligations of Member States in managing natural habitats.

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 October 2024.Rechtsanwältin und Notarin v Präsidentin des Oberlandesgerichts Hamm.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 2(2)(a) and Article 6(1) – Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of age – Upper age limit of 60 years for first appointment to the position of lawyer commissioned as notary – Vacant positions due to a lack of younger candidates – Justification – Appropriateness and necessity.Case C-408/23.

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) – Case C‑408/23

On 17 October 2024, the Court delivered a ruling regarding the interpretation of Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78/EC and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The case arose from a request for a preliminary ruling by the Oberlandesgericht Köln (Higher Regional Court, Cologne, Germany) concerning the rejection of an application for the position of lawyer commissioned as notary, based on an upper age limit of 60 years.

Legal Context

Directive 2000/78/EC establishes a framework for combating discrimination in employment based on various grounds, including age. Article 6(1) allows for differences in treatment based on age, provided they are objectively justified by a legitimate aim and the means to achieve that aim are appropriate and necessary.

Key Provisions and Findings

• Upper Age Limit: The national provision in question, Paragraph 5(4) of the Bundesnotarordnung (BNotO), states that individuals over 60 cannot be appointed for the first time as notaries. This provision directly affects access to self-employment in the notarial profession.
• Discrimination Based on Age: The Court acknowledged that the age requirement results in less favorable treatment based solely on age, constituting direct discrimination under the Directive.
• Legitimate Aims: The Court recognized several legitimate aims pursued by the age limit, including ensuring a sufficient period of service before retirement, maintaining a high-quality notarial profession, and promoting a balanced age structure within the profession.
• Appropriateness and Necessity: The Court found that the age limit is appropriate for ensuring candidates can serve for a reasonable period before retirement. It also determined that the limit does not exceed what is necessary to achieve the stated aims.

Specific Questions Addressed

The referring court posed four key questions regarding the interpretation of the relevant EU laws:

1. The Court ruled that national legislation with a mandatory upper age limit of 60 years does not breach EU law, provided it pursues legitimate objectives and is appropriate and necessary.
2. Questions regarding the inability to fill positions due to a lack of suitable younger candidates were deemed hypothetical and inadmissible, as there was no concrete evidence of such situations occurring.

Conclusion

The Court concluded that Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78, in conjunction with Article 21 of the Charter, does not preclude national legislation imposing an upper age limit for first appointments as notaries, as long as the legislation serves legitimate employment policy objectives and is justified as appropriate and necessary. This ruling reinforces the balance between age discrimination protections and the operational needs of the notarial profession within the framework of EU law.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 October 2024.Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd v Datel Design and Development Ltd and Others.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Intellectual property – Copyright and related rights – Legal protection of computer programs – Directive 2009/24/EC – Article 1 – Scope – Forms of expression of a computer program – Concept – Article 4(1)(b) – Alteration of a computer program – Change of the content of the variables stored in the computer’s RAM and used during the running of the program.Case C-159/23.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) – Case C-159/23

This judgment addresses the interpretation of specific provisions of Directive 2009/24/EC concerning the legal protection of computer programs. The case arises from a dispute between Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Ltd and Datel Design and Development Ltd regarding the alleged infringement of Sony’s exclusive rights to alter a computer program.

Legal Context

The judgment references international legal frameworks including the WIPO Copyright Treaty, the TRIPS Agreement, and the Berne Convention, all of which establish that copyright protection extends to expressions of works, rather than to the underlying ideas or methods of operation.

Directive 2009/24/EC

Directive 2009/24/EC serves as the cornerstone for the legal protection of computer programs within the EU. It stipulates that:

• Computer programs are protected by copyright as literary works, including their preparatory design material.
• Protection applies to the expression in any form of a computer program, while underlying ideas and principles are not protected.
• A computer program is eligible for protection if it is original, reflecting the author’s own intellectual creation.

Key Provisions Discussed

Article 4(1)(b) grants exclusive rights to the rightholder, including the right to authorize alterations of a computer program, which encompasses translations, adaptations, and other modifications.

Dispute Background

In this case, Datel developed software that allows users to alter the gameplay experience of Sony’s games. Sony contended that this software infringed its copyright by altering the protected computer program without authorization.

Questions Referred for Preliminary Ruling

The Bundesgerichtshof sought clarification on two main questions:

1. Whether the alteration of variable data in RAM, rather than changes to the source or object code of a computer program, constitutes an infringement of copyright protection.
2. Whether such an alteration falls within the definition of “alteration” under Article 4(1)(b) of the Directive.

Court’s Findings

The Court ruled that:

• The content of variable data transferred to RAM does not fall within the scope of protection under Directive 2009/24 if it does not enable the reproduction or subsequent creation of the program.
• As a result, the changes made by Datel’s software, which do not alter the underlying code but only modify variable content in RAM, do not constitute an infringement of Sony’s copyright.

Conclusion

This judgment clarifies the boundaries of copyright protection for computer programs, particularly in relation to alterations that do not involve changes to the code itself but rather affect the operational data during runtime.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 October 2024.FA.RO. di YK & C. Sas v Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Services in the internal market – Directive 2006/123/EC – Authorisation scheme – Article 10 – Conditions for the granting of authorisation – Sale of tobacco products – National legislation making the grant of authorisation to establish a point of sale for tobacco products subject to compliance with conditions – Conditions relating to distance and population – Protection of public health against smoking.Case C-16/23.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) – Case C‑16/23

Date: 17 October 2024

Overview

This judgment addresses the interpretation of European Union laws concerning the provision of services in the internal market, specifically regarding the establishment of points of sale for tobacco products in Italy. It considers the compatibility of national legislation with EU directives that aim to facilitate the freedom of establishment for service providers while ensuring public health protection.

Key Provisions

Legal Context

International Law

The judgment references the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which recognizes the health risks associated with tobacco use and outlines measures aimed at reducing tobacco demand.

European Union Law

The Court interprets Articles 49 and 56 TFEU, along with Article 15 of Directive 2006/123/EC, which establishes the framework for the provision of services in the internal market. This directive aims to eliminate barriers to service provision across Member States while also allowing for certain public interest restrictions, such as those related to public health.

Italian Legislation

The ruling examines specific Italian laws, including Law No 1293/1957 and Decree-Law No 98/2011, which impose conditions on the establishment of points of sale for tobacco products. These conditions include minimum distances between outlets and population-based restrictions aimed at controlling tobacco supply and protecting public health.

Judgment Findings

The Court concluded that national legislation requiring compliance with conditions related to minimum geographical distances and population ratios does not inherently conflict with EU law, provided that:

• The conditions are justified by an overriding public interest, particularly in protecting public health.
• They are likely to deter demand for tobacco products.
• They apply equally to cigarette vending machines.
• They comply with principles of clarity, non-ambiguity, objectivity, publicity, transparency, and accessibility.

Implications of the Ruling

The judgment emphasizes that while Member States have the discretion to implement health protection measures, these measures must be proportionate and cannot unduly restrict competition unless justified by public health objectives. It also highlights the need for a careful assessment of the actual demand for tobacco products in relation to the established conditions.

Conclusion

The Court’s ruling reinforces the balance between public health interests and the freedoms of establishment and service provision within the EU, providing guidance on how national legislation can align with EU directives while addressing health concerns associated with tobacco sales.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 October 2024.NFŠ a.s. v Slovenská republika konajúca prostredníctvom Ministerstva školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu Slovenskej republiky and Ministerstvo školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu Slovenskej republiky.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Public procurement of works, supplies and services – Directive 2004/18/EC – Concept of ‘public works contracts’ – Collection of agreements comprising a grant agreement and an undertaking to purchase – Direct economic interest for the contracting authority – Work corresponding to the requirements specified by the contracting authority – Grant and undertaking to purchase constituting State aid compatible with the internal market – Directive 89/665/EEC – Directive 2014/24/EU – Consequences of a finding that a public contract is ineffective – Absolute invalidity ex tunc.Case C-28/23.

Directive 2004/18/EC on Public Contracts

Article 1: Definitions

Public Contracts are defined as contracts for pecuniary interest concluded in writing between one or more economic operators and one or more contracting authorities. These contracts involve the execution of works, the supply of products, or the provision of services within the scope of the directive.
Public Works Contracts specifically refer to contracts that involve the execution or both the design and execution of works related to activities listed in Annex I. Additionally, they include the realization of a work that meets the requirements specified by the contracting authority. A “work” is the outcome of building or civil engineering activities sufficient to fulfill an economic or technical function.
Contracting Authorities encompass the State, regional or local authorities, bodies governed by public law, and associations formed by such authorities or bodies governed by public law.

Directive 2014/24/EU on Public Procurement

Article 1: Scope

This directive establishes rules for the procurement procedures of contracting authorities concerning public contracts and design contests, especially those with values not less than the thresholds outlined in Article 4.

Article 2: Definitions

Contracting Authorities include the State, regional or local authorities, bodies governed by public law, and associations formed by such authorities or bodies governed by public law.
Public Contracts are contracts for pecuniary interest concluded in writing between one or more economic operators and one or more contracting authorities, involving the execution of works, the supply of products, or the provision of services.
Public Works Contracts are a subset of public contracts focused on the realization of works based on requirements specified by the contracting authority, with the contracting authority exerting decisive influence over the type or design of the work.

Article 83: Enforcement

Member States must ensure effective implementation by designating competent authorities, bodies, or structures. These entities are responsible for monitoring the application of public procurement rules. If violations or systemic problems are identified, they are empowered to refer these issues to national auditing authorities, courts, tribunals, or other appropriate bodies.

Article 90: Transposition

Member States are required to adopt necessary laws, regulations, and administrative provisions to comply with this directive by April 18, 2016.

Article 91: Repeal

Directive 2004/18/EC is repealed effective from April 18, 2016.

Directive 89/665/EEC on Review Procedures for Public Contracts

Article 1: Scope and Availability of Review Procedures

Member States must ensure that decisions by contracting authorities regarding public contracts can be effectively reviewed. These review procedures should be accessible to any person with an interest in obtaining a particular contract who has been or may be harmed by an alleged infringement.

Article 2d: Ineffectiveness

A contract can be deemed ineffective if it was awarded without prior publication of a contract notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless permissible under relevant directives. The consequences of such ineffectiveness are governed by national law, which may include the retroactive cancellation of contractual obligations.

Slovak National Laws

Law No 40/1964 on the Civil Code

Any legal act that contravenes or circumvents the law, or is against accepted moral principles, is considered void.

Law No 25/2006 on Public Procurement

Paragraph 3(3): Defines a works contract as one involving the execution or both design and execution of construction works related to specified activities, ensuring that the constructed works fulfill economic or technical functions as required by the contracting authority.
Paragraph 147a: Establishes that contracts concluded in breach of public procurement laws can be declared invalid by the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority or the public prosecutor within one year of their conclusion.

Law No 343/2015 on Public Procurement

Paragraph 3(3): Expands the definition of a works contract to include contracts for the execution of works, regardless of the formatting by the contracting authority, as long as the authority exerts decisive influence over the construction type or design.
Paragraph 181: Provides that interested parties may apply to a court to declare contracts void if public procurement procedures were breached, with specific time limits for raising such claims.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2024.Karl und Georg Anwander GbR Güterverwaltung v Land Baden-Württemberg.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common agricultural policy (CAP) – Funding by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) – Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 – Articles 31 and 32 – Payments for areas facing natural or other specific constraints – Mountain areas – Compensatory allowance – National administrative provisions excluding payment of that allowance for eligible areas situated in a region, of the same Member State, other than the region where the place of business of the agricultural holding is located – Provisions using the place of business of the agricultural holding as a condition for the grant of that compensatory allowance.Case C-239/23.

Judgment Overview: C-239/23 – Compensatory Allowances in Agricultural Policy

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on 17 October 2024, addressing the interpretation of specific articles within Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 concerning the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). The case arose from a request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Sigmaringen (Administrative Court, Sigmaringen, Germany) concerning the eligibility for compensatory allowances for farmers operating in mountain areas and other regions facing natural constraints.

Key Provisions Analyzed

1. Regulation No 1305/2013

Article 31 of Regulation No 1305/2013 stipulates that compensatory payments are to be made to farmers in mountain areas and other areas facing constraints as a form of income support. Article 32 outlines the criteria for designating these areas, emphasizing that eligibility must be based on objective, biophysical characteristics.

2. National Administrative Practices

The case highlighted the conflict between national regulations in Germany, specifically in the Lands of Baden-Württemberg and Bavaria, which imposed additional conditions for the grant of compensatory allowances. Notably, these included the requirement that the farmer’s place of business be located in the same region as the agricultural land in question.

Judgment Summary

First and Second Questions

The Court concluded that while Member States have the discretion to define the conditions for granting compensatory allowances, they cannot exclude payments solely based on the geographical location of the land relative to the farmer’s place of business. The Court determined that such a restriction contravenes the principles of EU law, specifically Articles 31 and 32 of Regulation No 1305/2013.

Third Question

The Court affirmed that farmers have a right to payment of compensatory allowances under EU law if their land is classified as eligible for such payments in the rural development programme of the respective Member State or region. This right is contingent upon the land being designated as facing natural constraints, and the farmer being classified as an active farmer.

Fourth Question

The Court deemed it unnecessary to address the fourth question regarding the legal nature and scope of measures implementing these provisions, as the previous answers sufficiently clarified the legal landscape concerning compensatory payments.

Conclusion

The ruling establishes critical precedents regarding the interpretation of EU agricultural funding regulations, emphasizing non-discrimination principles and the necessity for objective criteria in determining eligibility for compensatory allowances. It underscores the requirement for Member States to align their administrative practices with EU law, ensuring that farmers are treated equitably regardless of the administrative boundaries within which they operate.

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2024.E EAD v DW.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Package tour – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Article 3(6) – Directive (EU) 2015/2302 – Article 14(5) – Cumulative application – Limitations – Regulation No 261/2004 – Article 3(2) – Article 4(3) – Compensation for passengers in the event of denied boarding – Passengers informed in advance of denied boarding – Incorrect information – Tour operator transferring passengers to another flight – Flight nonetheless carried out by the operating air carrier as originally planned – Operating air carrier’s obligation to provide compensation – Article 13 – Possibility of seeking reimbursement from the tour operator.Case C-650/23.

Court Judgment on Compensation Rights for Air Passengers in Package Tours

Overview

The Court of Justice addressed key provisions of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 in the context of package tours, specifically focusing on pre-emptive denied boarding and passengers’ rights to compensation. The judgment clarifies the obligations of operating air carriers when tour operators alter flight reservations.

Key Provisions Analyzed

• Regulation (EC) No 261/2004
  • Article 2(j): Defines “denied boarding” as refusal to carry passengers who have presented themselves for boarding, barring reasonable grounds.
  • Article 4(3): Mandates compensation to passengers if boarding is denied against their will.
  • Article 7(1): Specifies compensation amounts based on flight distance.
• Directive (EU) 2015/2302
  • Article 14(5): Ensures that rights under this directive do not negate passengers’ rights under Regulation No 261/2004.

Court’s Interpretation and Rulings

Pre-emptive Denied Boarding

The court concluded that pre-emptive denied boarding, where passengers are informed in advance by a tour operator about changes to their flight reservations, falls within the scope of “denied boarding” under Article 2(j) of Regulation No 261/2004. This holds true even if the actual flight is subsequently operated as originally planned.

Responsibility of Operating Air Carriers

The judgment reinforces that operating air carriers are liable for compensation under Article 7(1) when a tour operator alters a passenger’s reservation without prior consultation with the carrier. Incorrect information provided by tour operators regarding flight changes is deemed attributable to the air carrier, obligating them to compensate affected passengers.

Interplay Between Regulation and Directive

Under Article 14(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/2302, passengers are entitled to claims under both the directive and Regulation No 261/2004. However, compensations under these frameworks must be adjusted to prevent overcompensation.

Implications for Passengers and Providers

Passengers booking package tours can rely on Regulation No 261/2004 for compensation in cases of denied boarding, even when changes are initiated by tour operators. Operating air carriers must ensure accurate communication regarding flight reservations and compensate passengers when discrepancies arise due to tour operator actions.

Conclusion

The Court’s judgment underscores the protection offered to air passengers under EU law, ensuring that operating carriers remain accountable for maintaining accurate flight information and adhering to compensation regulations, thereby enhancing consumer rights within the air transport sector.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 October 2024.SC AA SRL v MFE.Reference for a preliminary ruling – European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) – Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 – Article 60 – Principle of sound financial management – Article 80 – Right of beneficiaries to receive payments as soon as possible and in full – Right to obtain interest for late payment – Principles of effectiveness and equivalence – Termination of an ERDF financing contract on account of irregularities in its performance – Annulment of that termination – Correction of the irregularities – Combating late payment in commercial transactions – Directive 2011/7/EU – Scope.Case C-701/22.

Detailed Description of EU Judgment on ERDF Financing Contract

Case Overview

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered a judgment on 17 October 2024 in Case C‑701/22. The case involves a preliminary ruling request from the Curtea de Apel Cluj (Court of Appeal, Cluj, Romania) concerning the interpretation of several provisions related to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) under Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 and Directive 2011/7/EU.

Key Provisions Analyzed

Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006

• Article 60 – Principle of Sound Financial Management:
  Mandates the managing authority to oversee and implement operational programs in line with sound financial management. This includes ensuring that funded operations meet applicable criteria and comply with both Community and national regulations throughout their implementation.
• Article 80 – Right of Beneficiaries:
  Ensures that beneficiaries receive the total amount of public contributions promptly and in full. It prohibits deductions, withholdings, or any charges that would reduce the amounts payable to beneficiaries.
• Article 98 – Financial Corrections by Member States:
  Specifies that Member States are responsible for investigating irregularities related to the management of ERDF funds. Upon detection, they must make appropriate financial corrections, which may include canceling all or part of the public contributions based on the nature and severity of the irregularities.

Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046

• Point 59 of Article 2 – Principle of Sound Financial Management:
  Defines sound financial management as the implementation of the budget adhering to the principles of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness.

Directive 2011/7/EU on Combating Late Payment

• Article 1 – Subject Matter and Scope:
  Aims to combat late payments in commercial transactions to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market. It applies to all payments made as remuneration for commercial transactions.
• Article 2 – Definition of Commercial Transactions:
  Defines ‘commercial transactions’ as transactions between undertakings or between undertakings and public authorities that result in the delivery of goods or provision of services for remuneration.

Judgment Findings

Payment of Default Interest

The Court held that the principle of sound financial management under Article 60 of Regulation No 1083/2006 does not prohibit the managing authority from paying default interest for late payments corresponding to eligible expenditure under the ERDF. Additionally, the principle of effectiveness under Article 80 ensures that national laws cannot exclude the payment of such interest based on provisions that only allow interest after a specific repayment period.

Reduction of Default Interest Due to Irregularities

The Court determined that Articles 2(7) and 98(1)-(2) of Regulation No 1083/2006 do not prevent a national court from reducing the amount of default interest owed to an ERDF beneficiary due to detected irregularities in the financing contract, provided such reductions adhere to the principle of proportionality.

Applicability of Directive 2011/7/EU

It was concluded that Directive 2011/7/EU does not apply to financing contracts between a managing authority of a Member State and a profit-making undertaking where the contract’s purpose is the ERDF’s co-financing of a project involving the purchase of equipment from a third party. This exclusion is based on the nature of the transaction not fitting the directive’s definition of ‘commercial transactions’.

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment clarifies the application of EU financial regulations and directives in cases involving ERDF financing contracts. It reinforces the rights of beneficiaries to receive payments promptly and in full, including default interest for late payments, while outlining the boundaries within which national courts can adjust such interest in the presence of contractual irregularities.

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 17 October 2024.Skatteverket v Digital Charging Solutions GmbH.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Articles 14 and 15 – Electric vehicle charging – Charging using devices provided by a company and allowing access to a network of charging points operated by different operators – Classification of the transaction for VAT purposes – ‘Supply of goods’ – Transfer made under commission contracts.Case C-60/23.

EU Court Judgment on VAT Classification for Electric Vehicle Charging

Background

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) addressed a preliminary ruling request concerning the interpretation of Articles 14 and 15 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax (VAT). The case involved Digital Charging Solutions GmbH and the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket), focusing on the VAT classification of electric vehicle (EV) charging services.

Key Legal Provisions

Article 14 of Directive 2006/112/EC

Defines “supply of goods” as the transfer of the right to dispose of tangible property as owner. It includes provisions for transactions made under commission contracts, where commission is payable on purchase or sale.

Article 15(1) of Directive 2006/112/EC

Specifies that electricity, gas, heat, cooling energy, and similar commodities shall be treated as tangible property.

Judgment Findings

1. Supply of Electricity as Supply of Goods

The Court interpreted Article 14(1) in conjunction with Article 15(1), determining that the supply of electricity for charging an electric vehicle at a public charging point constitutes a “supply of goods.” This classification is based on the definition that transferring electricity empowers the user to dispose of it as if they were the owner, aligning with the treatment of electricity as tangible property.

2. Classification of Transactions Involving Intermediaries

The Court examined whether transactions involving an intermediary company, such as Digital Charging Solutions, should be treated as a single supply or multiple supplies for VAT purposes. The key considerations included:

• Commission Contracts: Digital Charging Solutions acts as a commission agent, facilitating access to the charging network while not independently purchasing electricity.
• Economic Reality: Users pay a fixed fee for network access and services irrespective of electricity usage, indicating that the services are distinct from the supply of electricity.

Conclusively, the Court ruled that such transactions involve two separate supplies:

1. The operator of the charging network supplies electricity to the intermediary company.
2. The intermediary company supplies electricity to the end-user.

This dual supply structure aligns with Article 14(2)(c) of the Directive, which pertains to supply of goods under commission contracts, ensuring both stages of supply are recognized for VAT purposes.

Final Rulings

1. Article 14(1) and Article 15(1) Interpretation: The supply of electricity for charging an electric vehicle at a public charging point is classified as a “supply of goods.”
2. Article 14 Interpretation with Intermediaries: Charging an electric vehicle through a network accessed via a subscription with an intermediary company constitutes two separate supplies:
   • From the charging network operator to the intermediary company.
   • From the intermediary company to the end-user.

   This holds even if the end-user determines the quantity, timing, and location of the electricity usage.

Implications

This judgment clarifies the VAT treatment of electric vehicle charging services, particularly in scenarios involving intermediary companies. It ensures that both the supply from the network operator to the intermediary and from the intermediary to the user are subject to VAT, maintaining consistency within the EU’s VAT framework.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 October 2024.K and Others v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Immigration policy – Return of third-country nationals staying illegally in a Member State – Directive 2008/115/EC – Article 5 – Principle of non-refoulement – Enforcement of a return decision adopted in the context of a procedure for international protection, as a result of the illegal stay of the third-country national concerned arising from the rejection of an application for a residence permit provided for by national law – Obligation for the administrative authority to assess whether the enforcement of such a decision complies with the principle of non-refoulement – Article 13 – Remedies against decisions related to return – Obligation, for the national court, to raise of its own motion infringement of the principle of non-refoulement when enforcing a return decision – Scope – Article 4, Article 19(2) and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.Case C-156/23.

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) – Case C‑156/23

The judgment concerns the interpretation of several legal provisions related to the return of third-country nationals who are staying illegally in a Member State, specifically in the context of the principle of non-refoulement as outlined in Directive 2008/115/EC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Key Provisions Discussed

• Article 5 of Directive 2008/115/EC – Mandates that Member States must respect the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning individuals to countries where they face risks of torture or inhuman treatment.
• Article 19(2) of the Charter – Reinforces the non-refoulement principle, emphasizing the absolute nature of this prohibition regardless of the individual’s conduct.
• Article 47 of the Charter – Ensures the right to an effective remedy, requiring that judicial bodies can assess and raise issues of non-refoulement as necessary.

Context of the Case

The case involves K, L, M, and N, who applied for international protection in the Netherlands but had their applications rejected. Following the rejection, the Dutch authorities found their stay to be illegal and initiated a return decision. The Court was asked to clarify whether the authorities and national courts are required to assess compliance with the non-refoulement principle before enforcing such return decisions.

Judgment Highlights

The Court ruled that:

• Member States must ensure that when rejecting applications for residence permits, they also assess whether enforcing a return decision would violate the non-refoulement principle, especially if the return decision was previously made in the context of international protection.
• A national court, when reviewing such cases, is obligated to examine potential infringements of the non-refoulement principle based on the evidence available, even if the applicants did not raise this issue themselves.

Implications of the Ruling

This judgment underscores the necessity for thorough assessments of individual circumstances regarding potential risks upon return, thereby reinforcing the protection of fundamental rights within the EU legal framework. The ruling highlights that the principle of non-refoulement is not merely a procedural formality but a substantive legal obligation that must be actively considered in immigration enforcement actions.

Conclusion

The Court’s decision clarifies the responsibilities of both administrative authorities and judicial bodies in ensuring compliance with fundamental rights when dealing with the return of third-country nationals, thereby contributing to the broader framework of human rights protections within the European Union.

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 October 2024.ED v Ministero dell’Istruzione e del Merito and Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS).Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – Directive 1999/70/EC – Framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP – Clause 4 – Public sector – Teachers – Employment of fixed-term workers as career civil servants through recruitment based on qualifications – Determination of the period of service deemed accrued – Account taken only in part of periods of service completed under fixed-term contracts – Subsequent reinstatement of the period of service not taken into account – No effect on the assessment of the existence of discrimination.Case C-322/23.

Judgment Analysis: Case C‑322/23 [Lufoni]

Case Reference

Case Number: C‑322/23 [Lufoni]
Court: Court of Justice of the European Union, Seventh Chamber
Date: 17 October 2024
Language of the Case: Italian

Subject Matter

• Social policy
• Directive 1999/70/EC on fixed-term work
• Employment conditions for fixed-term workers in the public sector, specifically teachers

Framework Agreement Provisions

Clause 3

Defines key terms:

• Fixed-term worker: A worker with a contract whose end is determined by objective conditions such as a specific date, task completion, or event occurrence.
• Comparable permanent worker: A worker with an indefinite contract performing the same or similar work, considering qualifications and skills. If no such worker exists in the establishment, comparisons are made based on applicable collective agreements or national law.

Clause 4

Addresses treatment and qualifications related to fixed-term workers:

• Clause 4(1): Fixed-term workers should not be treated less favorably than comparable permanent workers solely because of their fixed-term contracts, unless justified by objective grounds.
• Clause 4(4): Period-of-service qualifications for specific employment conditions must be equivalent for fixed-term and permanent workers, except where justified by objective grounds. This ensures that differences in service recognition are not discriminatory.

Italian National Legislation Analyzed

The judgment examines several Italian laws in relation to the framework agreement:

• Legislative Decree No 297/1994:
  • Article 485(1): Recognizes fixed-term teaching service as permanent employment for legal and salary purposes: fully for the first four years, two-thirds thereafter for legal and salary purposes, and one-third solely for salary purposes.
  • Article 489(1): Defines a full academic year of service based on duration criteria set by the educational system.
• Law No 124/1999:
  • Article 11(14): Specifies conditions under which fixed-term teaching service is considered a full academic year.
• Presidential Decree No 399/1988:
  • Article 4(3): Details the reinstatement of service periods for salary purposes upon reaching certain years of service.

Key Findings of the Judgment

Interpretation of Clause 4

The Court interpreted Clause 4 of the framework agreement to prohibit national legislation that imposes more restrictive conditions on the recognition of fixed-term service periods compared to permanent service. Specifically:

• National laws limiting the recognition of service beyond two-thirds after four years are precluded.
• The reinstatement mechanism under Article 4(3) of Presidential Decree No 399/1988, which restores only one-third of the service period for salary purposes after a prolonged period, does not justify the initial limitation imposed.

Preclusion of National Legislation

The Court ruled that:

• Clause 4 precludes national legislation that restricts the recognition of fixed-term service periods in permanent employment to two-thirds beyond four years.
• The subsequent reinstatement of the remaining one-third solely for salary purposes does not satisfy the prohibition against less favorable treatment.

Discrimination Assessment

The difference in treatment between fixed-term and permanent workers must be assessed based on comparable situations and cannot be justified by general national norms. Objective grounds must be specific and verifiable at the time of assessment.

Conclusion of the Judgment

The Court concluded that:

• Clause 4 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work prevents Italian national legislation from limiting the recognition of fixed-term teaching service to two-thirds for service periods beyond four years.
• The reinstatement provision in Article 4(3) does not provide sufficient objective justification to override the framework agreement’s protections against discriminatory treatment.

Implications

This judgment reinforces the EU framework agreement’s stance against less favorable treatment of fixed-term workers in the public sector, ensuring greater parity with permanent workers in the recognition of service periods.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2024.HB v Bundesrepublik Deutschland.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Social policy – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 2(2)(a) – Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of age – Mandatory retirement age – National legislation precluding any postponement of the retirement of federal judges – Possibility for federal civil servants and Land judges to request the postponement of retirement – Difference in treatment on grounds of membership of a socio-professional category or place of work.Case C-349/23.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) – Case C-349/23 [Zetschek]

On 17 October 2024, the Court delivered its judgment regarding a preliminary ruling referred by the Verwaltungsgericht Karlsruhe concerning the interpretation of Article 2(2)(a) and Article 6(1) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC. The case centers around the refusal of the President of the Bundesgerichtshof to allow a federal judge, HB, to postpone his retirement, which is mandated at the age of 67 under German law.

Legal Framework

Directive 2000/78/EC aims to combat discrimination based on age, among other grounds, in employment and occupation. Article 2 establishes the principle of equal treatment, prohibiting both direct and indirect discrimination. Direct discrimination occurs when an individual is treated less favorably than another in a comparable situation based on any of the grounds listed in Article 1, including age.
Additionally, Article 6(1) allows for differences in treatment based on age if they are objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate aim, such as employment policy or vocational training objectives.

German Legal Provisions

According to Paragraph 48 of the Deutsches Richtergesetz (DRiG), judges appointed for an indefinite term must retire at the statutory retirement age of 67, with no possibility for postponement. In contrast, Paragraph 51 of the Bundesbeamtengesetz (BBG) allows federal civil servants to postpone retirement for up to three years if certain conditions are met, while Paragraph 6 of the Landesrichter- und Staatsanwaltgesetz des Landes Baden-Württemberg permits Land judges to request a one-year postponement.

Dispute Overview

HB, born in 1960, sought to challenge the retirement age stipulations, arguing that the inability to postpone retirement constituted direct discrimination based on age since other categories of public servants had such options. The German Government, however, contended that the appointment conditions of federal judges differ fundamentally from those of federal civil servants and Land judges, thus justifying the different treatment.

Court’s Findings

The Court ruled that the difference in treatment between federal judges and other public servants does not constitute direct discrimination based on age as defined in Article 2(2)(a) of the Directive. The Court emphasized that the distinction arises from the different professional roles and legislative frameworks governing federal judges compared to federal civil servants and Land judges. Therefore, the treatment difference was not based on age, but rather on professional categories, which are not covered under the Directive’s provisions.

Conclusion

The Court concluded that the national legislation that does not allow federal judges to postpone their retirement, while other public servants can, does not establish direct age discrimination under the Directive. Consequently, the subsequent questions regarding the justification and interpretation of the terms “objectively” and “reasonably” were deemed unnecessary to address, as they were contingent on the assumption of direct discrimination being present.
This judgment clarifies the boundaries of age discrimination in employment contexts, particularly concerning the specific roles and legislative distinctions between various public service positions.

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 October 2024.Riverty GmbH, successeur légal de Arvato Finance BV v MI.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 2008/48/EC – Scope – Credit agreements for consumers – Exceptions – Article 2(2)(f) – Interest-free credit agreements without other charges or providing for negligible charges – Deferred payment service ‘Buy now, pay later’ – Late payment – Default interest and out-of-court collection costs.Case C-409/23.

Directive 2008/48/EC on Credit Agreements for Consumers

Article 2 – Scope

1. This Directive applies to credit agreements.
2. The Directive does not apply to the following:

• (c) Credit agreements involving a total amount of credit less than EUR 200 or more than EUR 75,000.
• (f) Credit agreements where the credit is granted free of interest and without any other charges, and credit agreements under the terms where the credit must be repaid within three months with only insignificant charges payable.

Article 3 – Definitions

(c) Credit Agreement: An agreement where a creditor grants or promises to grant to a consumer credit in the form of deferred payment, loan, or other similar financial accommodation.
(g) Total Cost of the Credit to the Consumer: All costs, including interest, commissions, taxes, and any other fees that the consumer must pay in connection with the credit agreement and that are known to the creditor, except for notarial costs. This includes ancillary service costs, such as insurance premiums, if a service contract is mandatory to obtain the credit or its marketed terms.
(i) Annual Percentage Rate of Charge (APR): The total cost of the credit to the consumer, expressed as an annual percentage of the total amount of credit, including costs referred to in Article 19(2) if applicable.

Article 5 – Pre-contractual Information

1. Before the consumer is bound by any credit agreement or offer, the creditor and, where applicable, the credit intermediary must provide the consumer with necessary information to compare different offers and make an informed decision. This information must be provided in writing or another durable medium using the Standard European Consumer Credit Information form in Annex II.
The information must specify:

• (g) The annual percentage rate of charge and the total amount payable by the consumer.
• (l) The interest rate applicable in case of late payments, arrangements for its adjustment, and any charges payable for default.

Article 10 – Information to be Included in Credit Agreements

Paragraph 2 specifies that the credit agreement must clearly and concisely state:

• (g) The annual percentage rate of charge and the total amount payable by the consumer.
• (l) The interest rate applicable in case of late payments at the time of concluding the credit agreement, arrangements for its adjustment, and any charges payable for default.

Article 19 – Calculation of the Annual Percentage Rate of Charge

1. The APR, equating to the present value of all commitments (drawdowns, repayments, charges) on an annual basis, must be calculated following the mathematical formula in Part I of Annex I.
2. The total cost of credit excludes charges for non-compliance with commitments and charges other than the purchase price for goods or services, payable whether the transaction is in cash or credit. Costs related to account maintenance and payment transactions are included unless the account opening is optional with clearly separated costs.
3. The APR calculation assumes the credit agreement remains valid for the agreed period and that both creditor and consumer fulfill their obligations as specified.

Article 22 – Harmonisation and Imperative Nature of the Directive

3. Member States must ensure that the provisions adopted to implement this Directive cannot be circumvented by the formulation of agreements. Specifically, credit agreements covered by this Directive must not be integrated into agreements with different character or purpose to avoid the Directive’s application.

Annex II – Standard European Consumer Credit Information

Annex II outlines the information to be provided to consumers, including:

• Identity and contact details of the creditor or credit intermediary.
• Main characteristics of the credit product.
• Cost of the credit and related costs, including charges for late payments.

Interpretative Clarifications from Court Judgment

Based on the Court’s interpretation:

• Default interest and out-of-court collection costs do not fall within the definitions of ‘interest’ and ‘other charges’ in Article 2(2)(f) unless the creditor anticipates non-performance at the time of concluding the credit agreement to seek financial advantage.
• These charges are not considered in determining whether a credit agreement is ‘free of interest and without any other charges’ or has ‘only insignificant charges’ unless they are part of the creditor’s business model from the outset.
• The statutory or contractual nature and the amount of these charges do not inherently include them within the scope of Article 2(2)(f).

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 October 2024.QI v Santander Bank Polska S.A.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 2014/17/EU – Credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property – Article 25(1) – Early repayment – Consumer’s right to a reduction in the total cost of the credit – Article 4(13) – Concept of ‘total cost of the credit to the consumer’ – Costs that are dependent of the duration of the contract – Commission for granting the credit payable when concluding the contract – Methodology for calculating the reduction.Case C-76/22.

Directive 2014/17/EU on Credit Agreements for Consumers Relating to Residential Immovable Property

Article 1: Subject Matter

This Directive establishes a common framework for laws, regulations, and administrative provisions of Member States concerning credit agreements for consumers secured by a mortgage or related to residential immovable property. It includes obligations for creditworthiness assessments before granting credit, aims to develop effective underwriting standards, and sets prudential and supervisory requirements for credit intermediaries, appointed representatives, and non-credit institutions.

Article 3: Definitions

Definition (g) – Total Cost of the Credit to the Consumer: This encompasses all costs the consumer is required to pay in connection with the credit agreement, known to the creditor. It includes interest, commissions, taxes, and other fees, excluding notarial costs. Additionally, it covers costs related to ancillary services, such as insurance premiums, if obtaining a service contract is mandatory to secure the credit or to receive it under advertised terms and conditions.

Article 4: Definitions

Definition (13) – Total Cost of the Credit to the Consumer: Mirroring Article 3(g) of Directive 2008/48/EC, it includes all costs associated with the credit agreement known to the creditor, such as valuation costs necessary to obtain the credit. It excludes registration fees for transferring ownership of the immovable property and charges for non-compliance with the credit agreement commitments.

Article 14: Pre-contractual Information

Paragraph 1: Member States must ensure that creditors and, where applicable, credit intermediaries or appointed representatives provide consumers with personalized information necessary to compare available credits, assess implications, and make informed decisions. This information should be provided without undue delay after the consumer discloses their needs, financial situation, and preferences, and sufficiently in advance of the consumer being bound by any credit agreement or offer.

Paragraph 2: The personalized information must be delivered on paper or another durable medium using the European Standardised Information Sheet (ESIS) as outlined in Annex II.

Article 25: Early Repayment

Paragraph 1: Consumers have the right to fully or partially discharge their obligations under a credit agreement before its expiration. In such cases, consumers are entitled to a reduction in the total cost of the credit, which includes the interest and costs for the remaining duration of the contract.

Paragraph 2: Member States may impose conditions on exercising the early repayment right. These conditions can include time limitations, different treatments based on the type of borrowing rate or the timing of exercising the right, and restrictions related to the circumstances under which the right can be exercised.

Paragraph 3: Member States may allow creditors to claim fair and objectively justified compensation for costs directly linked to early repayment, provided it does not exceed the creditor’s financial loss. Additionally, Member States can set limits on the compensation amount or the period during which it is allowed.

Paragraph 4: Upon a consumer’s request to prepay, creditors must promptly provide necessary information to consider this option. This information should quantify the implications of discharging obligations early and clearly outline any assumptions used, ensuring they are reasonable and justifiable.

Paragraph 5: If early repayment occurs during a fixed borrowing rate period, Member States may require the presence of a legitimate interest on the consumer’s part to exercise the early repayment right.

Additional Provisions

Recital 15: Emphasizes the Directive’s goal to ensure consumers entering credit agreements related to immovable property receive high-level protection.

Recital 50: Details what constitutes the total cost of credit, reiterating the inclusion of known costs like interest and commissions while excluding notarial fees and registration costs related to property purchase.

Recital 66: Highlights the importance of allowing consumers the flexibility to repay credit early, promoting competition and financial stability. It permits Member States to define the conditions under which early repayment can occur, including time limitations and differing treatments based on borrowing rates or specific circumstances.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 164/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) and Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2572]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 164/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 164/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annexes I and II of the EEA Agreement concerning veterinary and phytosanitary matters and technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification. This amendment incorporates Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/451 into the EEA Agreement, which specifically addresses maximum residue levels for nicotine in various products.

Key Provisions

Article 1

This article adds a new indent in point 40 of Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement. It incorporates the aforementioned Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/451, which outlines the permissible maximum residue levels for nicotine, thus ensuring that EEA member states adhere to updated safety standards regarding food and feed products.

Article 2

Similar to Article 1, this article introduces a new indent in point 54zzy of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement. It reinforces the incorporation of Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/451, thereby extending its applicability in technical regulations and standards related to food safety within the EEA framework.

Article 3

This article stipulates that the text of Regulation (EU) 2024/451 will be published in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union. This provision ensures that the regulation is accessible to all EEA member states in their official languages, promoting transparency and understanding of the new regulations.

Article 4

Article 4 establishes the entry into force of this Decision on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This provision highlights the procedural requirements that must be met before the Decision takes effect.

Article 5

This article mandates the publication of the Decision in the EEA Section and EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring that the amendments are officially documented and disseminated among stakeholders and the public.

Exclusions

It is important to note that the legislation regarding feedingstuffs and foodstuffs will not apply to Liechtenstein as long as the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products remains in effect for Liechtenstein. This exclusion is specified in the sectoral adaptations to Annex I and the introduction to Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement.
Overall, this Decision is a significant step in aligning EEA regulations with EU standards concerning food safety, particularly concerning the regulation of nicotine residues in agricultural products.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 168/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex IX (Financial services) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2567]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 168/2024

The EEA Joint Committee Decision No 168/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex IX (Financial services) of the EEA Agreement to incorporate the Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2207. This decision pertains to the equivalence of financial markets in Australia, acknowledging recent developments in that country’s financial sector.

Key Provisions

• Article 1: This article updates point 31bcam of Annex IX to include a reference to the Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2207, which was adopted on 13 October 2023. This decision modifies the previous Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2272, thereby ensuring that the latest assessments concerning Australia’s financial markets are recognized within the EEA framework.
• Article 2: It specifies that the text of the Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/2207 in Icelandic and Norwegian will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, affirming the authenticity of these language versions.
• Article 3: This article establishes the entry into force of the Decision on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement, which pertains to the necessary procedural requirements for such amendments.
• Article 4: The Decision mandates its publication in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the amended provisions.

Context and Implications

This Decision reflects the ongoing efforts to maintain and adapt the regulatory framework governing financial services within the EEA, particularly in light of evolving international financial landscapes. By incorporating the latest Commission Implementing Decision regarding Australia’s financial markets, the EEA Joint Committee demonstrates its commitment to ensuring that the EEA Agreement remains relevant and responsive to global financial developments.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 160/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2569]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 160/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 160/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement, specifically concerning technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification.

Key Provisions

Article 1: Amendments to Annex II

This article specifies the changes made to Chapter XV of Annex II of the EEA Agreement. It introduces the following modifications:

• An additional indent is included in point 13a to reference Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011, which now cites:

  ‘— 32023 R 2456: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2456 of 7 November 2023 (OJ L, 2023/2456, 8.11.2023).’

• A new point is inserted after point 13zzzzzzzzzzzzzzd, designated as point 13zzzzzzzzzzzzzze, which states:

  ‘13zzzzzzzzzzzzzze. 32023 R 2456: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2456 of 7 November 2023 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance clofentezine, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ L, 2023/2456, 8.11.2023).’

Article 2: Authenticity of Language Versions

This article stipulates that the text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2456, to be published in the EEA Supplement, shall be authentic in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages.

Article 3: Entry into Force

The Decision will come into effect on 6 July 2024, contingent on the completion of all necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Article 4: Publication

This article mandates the publication of the Decision in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

Conclusion

This Decision serves to incorporate specific regulatory amendments concerning the approval status of the active substance clofentezine into the framework of the EEA Agreement, reflecting ongoing regulatory compliance and alignment with EU standards.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 166/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) and Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2558]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 166/2024

This decision, adopted on 5 July 2024, revises the EEA Agreement’s Annexes I and II, specifically concerning veterinary and phytosanitary matters and technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification.

Key Provisions

• Incorporation of Regulations: The decision incorporates three specific Commission Regulations into the EEA Agreement:
  • Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1076, which updates maximum residue levels for bispyribac, metosulam, oryzalin, oxasulfuron, and triazoxide.
  • Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1077, which amends maximum residue levels for 2,4-DB, iodosulfuron-methyl, mesotrione, and pyraflufen-ethyl.
  • Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1078, which addresses maximum residue levels for azoxystrobin, flonicamid, isofetamid, mefentrifluconazole, metazachlor, pyrimethanil, and quartz sand.
• Exemption for Liechtenstein: The legislation regarding feedingstuffs and foodstuffs will not apply to Liechtenstein as long as the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products remains applicable to Liechtenstein.
• Amendments to Annexes: The decision mandates the addition of specific indents in:
  • Point 40 of Chapter II of Annex I, which pertains to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005.
  • Point 54zzy of Chapter XII of Annex II, also concerning Regulation (EC) No 396/2005.
• Authenticity of Texts: The texts of the three mentioned regulations will be published in Icelandic and Norwegian languages, ensuring their authenticity in the EEA context.
• Entry into Force: The decision will come into effect on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication Requirement: The decision will be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

In summary, this decision updates the EEA Agreement by incorporating recent EU regulations concerning maximum residue levels of certain substances in food and feed, while also clarifying the applicability of these regulations to Liechtenstein.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 159/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2579]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 159/2024

On July 5, 2024, the EEA Joint Committee adopted Decision No 159/2024, which amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement related to technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification. This amendment incorporates three Commission Implementing Regulations concerning novel foods into the EEA Agreement.

Key Provisions

• Incorporation of Novel Foods: The Decision specifically incorporates the following regulations into the EEA Agreement:
• Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2847 authorizing the market placement of apple fruit cell culture biomass as a novel food.
• Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2851 authorizing the market placement of partially hydrolysed protein from spent barley and rice as a novel food.
• Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2852 correcting previous regulations regarding the conditions of use for astaxanthin-rich oleoresin from Haematococcus pluvialis algae.
• Exemption for Liechtenstein: The Decision clarifies that legislation concerning foodstuffs does not apply to Liechtenstein, provided the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein.
• Amendments to Annex II: The Decision amends Chapter XII of Annex II to include new points that reference the aforementioned Implementing Regulations, ensuring that they are part of the EEA legal framework.
• Authentic Texts in Icelandic and Norwegian: The texts of the Implementing Regulations in Icelandic and Norwegian will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union and shall be considered authentic.
• Entry into Force: The Decision will enter into force on July 6, 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication: The Decision will be published in the EEA Section and EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Decision reflects the ongoing integration of EU food safety legislation within the EEA framework, facilitating the market access of novel foods while maintaining specific exemptions for certain member states.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 175/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2556]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 175/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 175/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement. This amendment is primarily focused on the incorporation of a specific Commission Implementing Decision related to the calculation of CO2 savings for certain hybrid electric passenger cars.

Key Provisions

• Incorporation of Commission Implementing Decision: The decision incorporates Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/766, which was issued on 1 March 2024. This decision modifies the existing Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1119, specifically regarding how CO2 savings and statistical margins are calculated for certain not off-vehicle charging hybrid electric passenger cars.
• Amendment of Annex XX: The amendment adds a new indent to point 21aezd of Annex XX, formally referencing the Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/766.
• Language Authenticity: The decision stipulates that the text of Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/766 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages is to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring linguistic authenticity for these member states.
• Entry into Force: The decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication Requirement: It mandates that the Decision be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, thereby ensuring transparency and accessibility of the information.

Conclusion

This decision reflects the ongoing efforts within the EEA framework to align environmental regulations and standards, particularly concerning the automotive sector and emissions reduction. The incorporation of the new Implementing Decision is a significant step in harmonizing practices across the EEA, enhancing the regulatory framework for hybrid electric vehicles.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 169/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XI (Electronic communication, audiovisual services and information society) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2568]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 169/2024

On 5 July 2024, the EEA Joint Committee adopted Decision No 169/2024, which amends Annex XI of the EEA Agreement, specifically relating to electronic communication, audiovisual services, and information society. This amendment incorporates the Commission Implementing Decision EU 2023/1795 into the EEA Agreement.
The key points of the decision include:

• Incorporation of EU Legislation: The decision integrates Commission Implementing Decision EU 2023/1795, which concerns the adequate level of protection of personal data under the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, into the EEA Agreement.
• Connection to Previous Legislation: The decision references Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation), which was previously incorporated into the EEA Agreement by Decision No 154/2018. It emphasizes that Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway are to apply the measures from Implementing Decision EU 2022/254 in alignment with EU Member States.
• Amendment Details: A new point (5ex) is added to Annex XI, specifically noting the details of Commission Implementing Decision EU 2023/1795, including the publication reference in the Official Journal.
• Authenticity of Texts: The decision stipulates that the text of Implementing Decision EU 2023/1795 in Icelandic and Norwegian shall be authentic, ensuring that these languages are equally recognized within the EEA framework.
• Entry into Force: The decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as per Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication: The decision is mandated to be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.

This decision reflects ongoing efforts to harmonize data protection standards across the EEA and ensure that personal data is adequately protected under the EU-US framework.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 155/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2534]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 155/2024

This legal act pertains to the amendment of Annex II of the EEA Agreement, specifically focusing on technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification related to foodstuffs.

Key Provisions

Article 1

Article 1 introduces an amendment to point 54bo of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement. It adds a new indent that refers to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2785, which was established on 14 December 2023. This regulation concerns the recognition of certain control authorities and control bodies for the importation of organic products into the European Union. The specific reference is as follows:

• 32023 R 2785: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2785 of 14 December 2023 (OJ L, 2023/2785, 15.12.2023).

Article 2

Article 2 stipulates that the text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2785 will be published in both Icelandic and Norwegian languages in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union. This ensures that the regulation is accessible to those member states within the EEA where these languages are spoken.

Article 3

This article outlines the entry into force of the decision, which is set for 6 July 2024. However, this is contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement, indicating a procedural requirement that must be satisfied before the decision can take effect.

Article 4

Article 4 mandates the publication of this decision in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and official recognition of the amendment.

Contextual Notes

The decision explicitly notes that the legislation concerning foodstuffs does not apply to Liechtenstein, provided that the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products continues to be extended to Liechtenstein. This exclusion is specified in the introduction to Chapter XII of Annex II of the EEA Agreement.
In summary, this decision formally incorporates a new regulation into the EEA framework concerning the importation of organic products while clarifying language publication requirements and the applicability of the legislation to specific EEA member states.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 154/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2533]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 154/2024

This decision, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex II of the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement, specifically concerning technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification.

Key Provisions

Article 1

The decision adds a reference in point 52a of Chapter I of Annex II to the EEA Agreement, incorporating Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/883. This regulation, which modifies Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/535, pertains to:

• The second rear registration plate space for trailers.
• The mass of energy storage systems.

The amendment acknowledges the regulation as part of the EEA framework, ensuring that it is recognized within the context of EEA member states.

Article 2

The decision stipulates that the text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/883 will be published in both Icelandic and Norwegian, ensuring that these translations are considered authentic for the purposes of the EEA Agreement.

Article 3

This decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Article 4

The decision mandates the publication of this decision in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the legal text to stakeholders and the public.
In summary, this decision facilitates the incorporation of updated technical regulations into the EEA framework, supporting regulatory alignment and cooperation among EEA member states.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 158/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2580]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 158/2024

The EEA Joint Committee has adopted Decision No 158/2024 on July 5, 2024, which amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement regarding technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification. This decision primarily incorporates Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2214 into the EEA Agreement. This regulation, dated October 23, 2023, pertains to the conditions of use and specifications for novel foods, specifically focusing on partially defatted chia seed (Salvia hispanica) powders.
Importantly, the decision specifies that the legislation related to foodstuffs does not apply to Liechtenstein. This exemption is contingent upon the continued application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning trade in agricultural products, as outlined in the introduction to Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement.
The decision includes several articles:

• Article 1: Introduces an amendment to point 124b of Chapter XII in Annex II, adding a new indent that references the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2214.
• Article 2: Stipulates that the text of the aforementioned regulation in Icelandic and Norwegian will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, and these versions will be considered authentic.
• Article 3: States that the decision will enter into force on July 6, 2024, assuming all necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been completed.
• Article 4: Mandates the publication of this decision in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

The decision was signed in Brussels by the President of the EEA Joint Committee, Anders H. Eide, marking an important step in the regulatory framework governing novel foods within the EEA.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 174/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2561]

Overview of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 174/2024

The EEA Joint Committee Decision No 174/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex XX (Environment) of the EEA Agreement. This decision is primarily concerned with the incorporation of a new Commission Decision into the EEA framework, specifically focusing on environmental monitoring standards.

Key Provisions

Article 1: Replacement of Previous Decision

Article 1 states that the text of point 13cab, which refers to Commission Decision (EU) 2018/229, is to be replaced. The new text will incorporate Commission Decision (EU) 2024/721, which was established on 27 February 2024. This decision outlines the values of the Member State monitoring system classifications resulting from an intercalibration exercise, in accordance with Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. As a result, Commission Decision (EU) 2018/229 is officially repealed.

Article 2: Language Authenticity

Article 2 ensures that the text of Decision (EU) 2024/721, as it will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, is authentic in both Icelandic and Norwegian languages. This provision emphasizes the inclusion of all EEA member states in the decision-making process and ensures that language is not a barrier to understanding the regulations.

Article 3: Entry into Force

Article 3 specifies that the decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as required under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This provision establishes a clear timeline for when the amendments will take effect, ensuring that all member states are informed and prepared for compliance.

Article 4: Publication Requirement

Article 4 mandates that this decision be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union. This is crucial for maintaining transparency and ensuring that all stakeholders are aware of the updated provisions.

Conclusion

This decision marks an important step in the ongoing efforts to align environmental monitoring standards within the EEA framework. By repealing outdated provisions and incorporating updated classifications, the EEA Joint Committee aims to enhance the effectiveness of environmental governance across its member states.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 163/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) and Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2551]

Detailed Description of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 163/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 163/2024, dated 5 July 2024, focuses on amendments to the EEA Agreement concerning veterinary and phytosanitary matters as well as technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification.

Key Provisions

Amendments to Annex I and Annex II

The Decision amends Annex I and Annex II of the EEA Agreement to incorporate Commission Implementing Decision 2024/266. This decision designates a European Union reference centre for the welfare of aquatic animals in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/625. The amendments specifically include:

• Annex I, Chapter I: Insertion of a new point (11bzf) after point 11bze, detailing the Commission Implementing Decision 2024/266.
• Annex I, Chapter II: Insertion of a new point (31qza) following point 31qz, again referencing the Commission Implementing Decision 2024/266.
• Annex II, Chapter XII: Insertion of a new point (164zg) after point 164zf, which also details the Commission Implementing Decision 2024/266.

Exemption for Liechtenstein

The Decision specifies that legislation regarding veterinary matters, feedingstuffs, and foodstuffs will not apply to Liechtenstein, as long as the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products remains applicable to Liechtenstein. This is outlined in the sectoral adaptations to Annex I and the introduction to Chapter XII of Annex II of the EEA Agreement.

Authenticity of Language Versions

The Decision mandates that the text of Implementing Decision 2024/266 in Icelandic and Norwegian shall be considered authentic and will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.

Entry into Force and Publication

This Decision is set to enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. It will also be published in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

Conclusion

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 163/2024 represents an important step in aligning the EEA Agreement with EU legislation concerning the welfare of aquatic animals, while also clarifying the application of relevant regulations to member states, particularly regarding the exemption for Liechtenstein.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 152/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2531]

Analysis of the EEA Joint Committee Decision No 152/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 152/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) of the EEA Agreement. This amendment incorporates various Commission Implementing Regulations concerning feed additives into the EEA Agreement, reflecting updates and renewals of authorisations for specific preparations used as feed additives across different animal species.

Key Provisions

• Incorporation of Specific Regulations: The Decision incorporates multiple Commission Implementing Regulations into the EEA Agreement, specifically:
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/220: Renewal of the authorisation for Pediococcus pentosaceus NCIMB 30168 as a feed additive for all animal species.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/221: Renewal of the authorisation for endo–1,4-beta-xylanase, endo–1,3(4)-beta-glucanase, and endo–1,4-beta-glucanase for use in poultry and weaned piglets.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/228: Authorisation for Companilactobacillus farciminis CNCM I-3740 as a feed additive for chickens and turkeys.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/231: Authorisation for halofuginone hydrobromide (Stenorol) for use in chickens and turkeys.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/239: Amendments to previous regulations related to various feed additives.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/252: Renewal of the authorisation for Lactiplantibacillus plantarum DSM 23375 as a feed additive.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/261: Authorisation for black pepper essential oil and oleoresin for all animal species and specific extracts for cats and dogs.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/262: Renewal and expansion of the authorisation for endo–1,4-beta-glucanase for various poultry and piglets.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/285: Authorisation of taiga root tincture for use in dogs, cats, and horses.
• Liechtenstein Exemption: The Decision specifies that legislation regarding feedingstuffs shall not apply to Liechtenstein, provided that the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein.

Amendments to Annex I

Article 1 of the Decision details the specific amendments to Chapter II of Annex I of the EEA Agreement, including the addition of new points and indents referencing the incorporated regulations. Each regulation is cited with its respective publication information, ensuring clarity in the legal framework.

Authenticity and Languages

Article 2 states that the texts of the incorporated Implementing Regulations in Icelandic and Norwegian will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, affirming their authenticity in these languages.

Entry into Force

According to Article 3, the Decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of notifications required under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Publication

Article 4 mandates the publication of this Decision in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the legal text.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 162/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2577]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 162/2024

The EEA Joint Committee Decision No 162/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, pertains to the incorporation of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1295 into the EEA Agreement. This regulation establishes harmonised technical specifications and testing standards for fire hoses, which are essential for ensuring safety and interoperability across the European Economic Area (EEA).

Key Provisions

• Amendment of Annex II: The decision amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement by adding a new point that references the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1295. This incorporation signifies that the technical specifications and testing standards set out in the regulation are now applicable within the EEA framework.
• Authenticity of Texts: Article 2 of the decision mandates that the text of the Delegated Regulation in Icelandic and Norwegian languages shall be considered authentic. This ensures that the regulation is accessible and enforceable in all EEA member states that use these languages.
• Entry into Force: According to Article 3, the decision is set to enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This stipulation underscores the procedural requirements for the decision to take effect.
• Publication Requirements: Article 4 specifies that the decision will be published in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union. This publication is crucial for transparency and for informing stakeholders about the new regulations.

Context and Importance

This decision reflects the ongoing efforts to harmonise technical regulations within the EEA, enhancing safety standards for fire hoses. By adopting these specifications, the EEA aims to ensure that fire hoses meet consistent quality and safety benchmarks, thereby protecting users and facilitating trade among member states.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 165/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) and Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2578]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 165/2024

This decision, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annexes I and II of the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement concerning veterinary and phytosanitary matters as well as technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification.

Key Provisions

Incorporation of Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/891

The decision incorporates Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/891, which was adopted on 22 March 2024. This regulation pertains to the amendment of maximum residue levels for bifenazate in certain products, as established under Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. The incorporation aims to ensure that the EEA Agreement reflects the latest EU legislation regarding food safety and quality standards.

Exemption for Liechtenstein

Notably, the decision specifies that the provisions related to feedingstuffs and foodstuffs will not apply to Liechtenstein. This exemption is contingent upon the ongoing application of the agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation regarding agricultural product trade, which is extended to Liechtenstein. This means that while other EEA states must comply with the new regulations, Liechtenstein’s obligations remain governed by its specific trade agreements.

Amendments to Annexes

Article 1 of the decision adds a new entry under point 40 of Chapter II in Annex I, which lists the newly incorporated regulation. Similarly, Article 2 introduces a corresponding entry under point 54zzy of Chapter XII in Annex II. These amendments ensure that the EEA Agreement remains up to date with EU legislation and facilitates the harmonization of standards within the EEA.

Authenticity of Translations

Article 3 asserts that the text of Regulation (EU) 2024/891 will be published in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, confirming the authenticity of these translations for legal purposes.

Entry into Force

According to Article 4, the decision will come into effect on 6 July 2024, subject to the completion of all necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This provision emphasizes the procedural requirements that must be fulfilled before the decision is operational.

Publication

Finally, Article 5 mandates the publication of this decision in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the legal text for EEA member states and stakeholders.
In summary, Decision No 165/2024 represents a critical update to the EEA Agreement, aligning it with recent EU regulations while also recognizing specific exemptions applicable to Liechtenstein.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 173/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XIV (Competition) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2554]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 173/2024

The EEA Joint Committee Decision No 173/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex XIV (Competition) of the EEA Agreement. The decision incorporates two new Commission Regulations into the EEA framework and repeals two expired regulations.

Key Provisions:

1. Incorporation of New Regulations

The decision incorporates the following Regulations:

• Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1066 – This regulation concerns the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to specific categories of research and development agreements. It was published in the Official Journal on 2 June 2023.
• Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1067 – This regulation deals with the application of Article 101(3) TFEU to certain categories of specialization agreements, also published on 2 June 2023.

2. Repeal of Expired Regulations

The decision also addresses the expiry of:

• Commission Regulation (EU) No 1217/2010
• Commission Regulation (EU) No 1218/2010

These regulations, previously incorporated into the EEA Agreement, have now expired and are repealed as part of this decision.

3. Amendments to Annex XIV

The decision amends Annex XIV to reflect the incorporation and adaptations of the new regulations:

• For Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1067, adaptations include the insertion of references to corresponding provisions in Article 29 of Chapter II of Part II of Protocol 4 concerning the EFTA States’ Agreement on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice.
• For Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1066, similar adaptations are made to ensure consistency with the EFTA framework.

4. Entry into Force and Application

The decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of notifications required under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. It is applicable retroactively from 1 July 2023.

5. Authentic Texts

The decision stipulates that the texts of the incorporated regulations in Icelandic and Norwegian shall be considered authentic, ensuring linguistic inclusivity within the EEA framework.

6. Publication

Finally, the decision mandates its publication in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the legislative changes.
This decision reflects the ongoing efforts to harmonize competition law within the EEA and adapt to new developments in the regulatory landscape.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 180/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms [2024/2550]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 180/2024

This decision, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Protocol 31 of the EEA Agreement, which facilitates cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms. The primary focus of this amendment is to extend the existing cooperation of the Contracting Parties to include Regulation (EU) 2022/2370, enacted by the European Parliament and the Council on 23 November 2022. This regulation pertains to amendments made to Regulation (EC) No 851/2004, which established a European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

Key Provisions:

• Article 1: The decision specifies that the indent in point (a) of Article 16(4) of Protocol 31 will now include a reference to Regulation (EU) 2022/2370. This inclusion signifies the recognition of the importance of this regulation in the context of EEA cooperation.
• Article 2: The decision will come into force the day after the last notification is completed under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement, ensuring that the amendment takes effect promptly.
• Article 3: It mandates the publication of this decision in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the information to all stakeholders.

This decision represents a significant step in enhancing the collaboration among EEA member states in the field of disease prevention and control, reflecting the ongoing commitment to public health and safety across the region.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 177/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2544]

Analysis of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 177/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 177/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex XX (Environment) of the EEA Agreement to incorporate Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2867. This regulation, which was established on 5 October 2023, supplements Regulation (EU) 2019/631 of the European Parliament and the Council. It sets out guiding principles and criteria for the verification of CO2 emissions and fuel consumption values for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles in service.

Specifically, Article 1 of the Decision inserts a new point (21azp) into Annex XX, which references the aforementioned Delegated Regulation. This inclusion signifies the commitment of the EEA Joint Committee to align with the EU legislation aimed at improving environmental standards and ensuring accurate reporting of vehicle emissions and fuel consumption.

Article 2 stipulates that the text of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2867 will be published in Icelandic and Norwegian, ensuring authenticity and accessibility for EEA member states. This is an important aspect of the EEA’s commitment to maintaining multilingualism and inclusivity in its legal texts.

The Decision will take effect on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as outlined in Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This procedural requirement emphasizes the importance of compliance with internal governance processes before the new provisions can be implemented.

Finally, Article 4 mandates the publication of this Decision in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union, which serves to inform stakeholders and the public about the changes made to the EEA Agreement.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 178/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms [2024/2542]

Overview of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 178/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 178/2024, adopted on July 5, 2024, amends Protocol 31 of the EEA Agreement concerning cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms. This amendment is particularly relevant for the free movement of workers, coordination of social security schemes, and measures for migrants, including those from third countries.

Key Provisions

• Article 1: Updates the financial years referenced in Protocol 31. Specifically, it replaces the phrase “financial years 2021, 2022 and 2023” with “financial years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024.” This change reflects the continuation of financial commitments and cooperation for the specified years.
• Article 2: States that the Decision will enter into force the day after the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. It is set to apply from January 1, 2024, indicating a clear timeline for the implementation of the amendments.
• Article 3: Mandates the publication of the Decision in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the information to relevant stakeholders.

Context and Implications

This Decision reflects the EEA’s commitment to fostering cooperation among its Contracting Parties in light of ongoing Union actions that are funded from the general budget of the Union. The focus on the free movement of workers and social security coordination underscores the importance of these areas in promoting mobility and integration within the EEA.
By extending the financial framework to include the year 2024, the Decision facilitates continued collaboration and support for measures that benefit not only the member states but also migrants, thereby enhancing the overall social and economic fabric of the region.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 167/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) and Protocol 37 (containing the list provided for in Article 101) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2557]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 167/2024

This decision amends Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) and Protocol 37 to the EEA Agreement, mainly to incorporate Regulation (EU) 2022/123, which pertains to the European Medicines Agency’s enhanced role in crisis preparedness and management for medicinal products and medical devices.

Key Provisions

Article 1: Amendments to Annex II

• Participation of EFTA States:
  The EFTA States (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway) will be fully associated with the Executive Steering Group on Shortages and Safety of Medicinal Products and the Emergency Task Force as established by Regulation (EU) 2022/123. They will have the same rights and obligations as EU Member States, except for voting rights.
• Modification of Point 15ze:
  The text of point 15ze is updated to reflect the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/123, including an adaptation for Article 34(2) to include references to Article 53 of the EEA Agreement alongside Article 101 TFEU.

Article 2: New Insertions in Chapter XXX

• Point 16:
  Regulation (EU) 2022/123 is inserted into Chapter XXX, detailing the modalities for the EFTA States’ association with the Executive Steering Group on Shortages of Medical Devices, again highlighting their rights and obligations, minus voting rights.

Article 3: Amendments to Protocol 37

• Updated Text:
  Point 30 of Protocol 37 is revised to include references to the Executive Steering Group on Shortages and Safety of Medicinal Products, the Emergency Task Force, and the Executive Steering Group on Shortages of Medical Devices as established by Regulation (EU) 2022/123.

Article 4: Language Authenticity

• Authentic Texts:
  The corrected text of Regulation (EU) 2022/123 in Icelandic and Norwegian will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, maintaining its authenticity.

Article 5: Entry into Force

• Effective Date:
  This Decision will come into effect on 6 July 2024, contingent upon all notifications being completed in accordance with Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Article 6: Publication

• Official Publication:
  The Decision will be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

In summary, this Decision marks a significant step in ensuring that EFTA States are integrated into the EU’s regulatory framework concerning medicinal products and medical devices, particularly in times of crisis, thereby enhancing cooperation and safety standards across the region.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 153/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2532]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 153/2024

This decision amends Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) of the EEA Agreement, incorporating several Commission Implementing Regulations concerning feed additives.

Key Provisions:

• Incorporation of Regulations: The decision incorporates five specific Commission Implementing Regulations from February 2024 into the EEA Agreement:
• Regulation 2024/750: Renewal of the authorisation of thaumatin as a feed additive for all animal species, repealing Regulation No 869/2012.
• Regulation 2024/752: Denial of authorisation for a preparation of astaxanthin-rich Phaffia rhodozyma for use as a feed additive for salmon and trout.
• Regulation 2024/754: Amendments regarding the authorisation of a preparation of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens as feed additives for all poultry species.
• Regulation 2024/763: Renewal of authorisation of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum preparations as feed additives for all animal species, repealing Regulation No 308/2013.
• Regulation 2024/764: Authorisation of a preparation of Bacillus subtilis and Lactococcus lactis as feed additives for all animal species.
• Repeal of Previous Regulations: The decision repeals the previous regulations (No 869/2012 and No 308/2013) as they are now superseded by the new regulations.
• Exemption for Liechtenstein: The legislation regarding feedingstuffs will not apply to Liechtenstein, as long as the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein.
• Amendment of Annex I: Chapter II of Annex I to the EEA Agreement will be amended to include the new regulations and remove the texts of the repealed regulations.
• Language Authenticity: The texts of the incorporated regulations will be published in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, ensuring their authenticity within the EEA context.
• Entry into Force: The decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication: This decision will be published in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

In summary, this decision serves to update the EEA Agreement in relation to veterinary and phytosanitary matters, specifically focusing on the authorisation and regulation of various feed additives for animal species.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 151/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2530]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 151/2024

This decision, adopted on July 5, 2024, amends Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) of the EEA Agreement. It incorporates Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/2613, which was established on November 23, 2023, concerning transitional measures for the export of meat-and-bone meal intended for combustion.
Key points of the decision include:

• Incorporation of Regulation: The decision specifies that Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/2613 will be integrated into the EEA Agreement. This regulation addresses specific transitional measures relevant to veterinary matters.
• Exemption for Liechtenstein: It is notable that the legislation regarding veterinary matters will not apply to Liechtenstein. This exemption is in line with the application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products, which is extended to Liechtenstein.
• Amendment of Annex I: Article 1 of the decision states that a new indent will be added to point 9c (Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011) in Part 7.1 of Chapter I of Annex I to the EEA Agreement, specifically referencing the new regulation.
• Authentic Texts: Article 2 mandates that the text of Regulation (EU) 2023/2613 will be published in authentic versions in Icelandic and Norwegian languages in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.
• Entry into Force: The decision will take effect on July 6, 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication: Article 4 requires the decision to be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.

In conclusion, this decision formalizes the incorporation of specific veterinary legislation into the EEA framework while clarifying its applicability, particularly regarding Liechtenstein’s status.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 179/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms [2024/2540]

Analysis of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 179/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 179/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Protocol 31 of the EEA Agreement, specifically concerning cooperation in certain fields beyond the fundamental freedoms. This amendment specifically incorporates Regulation (EU) 2019/127, which establishes the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, commonly known as Eurofound.

Key Provisions

Article 1: This article updates point 10 of Article 5 of Protocol 31 to include the new regulation. The Contracting States are mandated to enhance their cooperation based on the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2019/127. This regulation aims to improve living and working conditions across the EEA, reflecting a commitment to social standards and policies that benefit workers.
The regulation being incorporated repeals the earlier Council Regulation (EEC) No 1365/75, which is also referenced in the EEA Agreement. This transition signifies a modernization of the framework governing Eurofound’s operations, aligning it with contemporary needs and practices in the labor market.
Article 2: The Decision stipulates that it will enter into force the day after the last notification is made under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement, with an effective application date set for 1 January 2024. This timeline allows for the necessary administrative arrangements and adjustments to be made by the Contracting Parties.
Article 3: This article mandates the publication of the Decision in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the updated provisions to all stakeholders involved.

Implications

By amending Protocol 31 to include Eurofound, the EEA Joint Committee emphasizes the importance of social policy and labor rights within the EEA framework. This move is expected to foster greater collaboration among the EFTA States in relation to Eurofound’s objectives, thereby enhancing the living and working conditions across the region. It reflects a broader commitment to ensuring that economic cooperation within the EEA is accompanied by social progress and improved standards for workers.
The Decision highlights the EEA’s adaptability in integrating new regulations that align with evolving social and economic landscapes, reinforcing the commitment of the Contracting Parties to uphold and advance social rights.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 176/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2539]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 176/2024

This decision amends Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement by incorporating Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1623. This Implementing Decision specifies performance values for manufacturers of new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles for the calendar year 2021, as well as the values to be used for calculating specific emission targets from 2025 onwards, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2019/631.

Key Provisions

Article 1: Amendments to Annex XX

• The first amendment adds a reference to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1623 in point 21azn, indicating that this decision corrects and updates the previous Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2087.
• A new point (21azo) is inserted, detailing the specifics of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1623, including its purpose, the relevant calendar year, and the emission targets for manufacturers of new passenger cars and light commercial vehicles.

Article 2: Authenticity of Texts

The decision mandates that the text of Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1623, including its corrections, should be published in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring accessibility and authenticity in these languages.

Article 3: Entry into Force

This decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon all necessary notifications being made under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Article 4: Publication

Finally, the decision stipulates that it will be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and public access to the amendments made.
This decision reflects the ongoing efforts to align environmental standards and regulations within the EEA framework, particularly concerning automotive emissions and performance metrics.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 171/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2538]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 171/2024: Amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 171/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, pertains to the incorporation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/204 into the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement. This regulation establishes technical specifications, standards, and procedures for the European Maritime Single Window environment, as mandated by Regulation (EU) 2019/1239 of the European Parliament and the Council.

Key Provisions

1. Article 1: This article amends Annex XIII of the EEA Agreement by inserting a new point (56lab) following point 56laa. The new point details the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/204, specifying that the text of the regulation will be applicable within the EEA framework, with a notable adaptation: the second paragraph of Article 5 of the regulation will not apply to the EFTA States.
2. Article 2: It states that the text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/204 will be provided in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages and published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring that language accessibility is maintained for EFTA member states.
3. Article 3: This article establishes that the Decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as required under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
4. Article 4: It mandates the publication of this Decision in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and public access to the legislative changes.

This Decision is part of the ongoing efforts to enhance maritime transport and regulatory coherence within the EEA, aligning EFTA states with EU maritime regulations while respecting their specific legal frameworks.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 161/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2559]

EEA Joint Committee Decision No 161/2024

The Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 161/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement, specifically concerning technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification.

Key Provisions

This Decision incorporates three Commission Implementing Regulations into the EEA Agreement, as outlined below:

• Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2513: This regulation, dated 16 November 2023, pertains to the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance triflusulfuron-methyl, following the guidelines set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.
• Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2589: Dated 21 November 2023, this regulation renews the approval of aluminium ammonium sulfate as an active substance, also in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.
• Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2591: This regulation, also dated 21 November 2023, renews the approval of ethephon as an active substance, in line with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009.

Amendments to Annex II

Article 1 of the Decision specifies the amendments to Chapter XV of Annex II:

1. New indents have been added to point 13a, referencing the three aforementioned regulations.
2. Points are inserted after point 13zzzzzzzzzzzzzze, detailing the specific regulations and their publication references.

Authenticity and Publication

Article 2 states that the texts of the Implementing Regulations will be published in Icelandic and Norwegian, ensuring their authenticity in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.

Entry into Force

According to Article 3, this Decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Publication of the Decision

Article 4 mandates the publication of this Decision in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 181/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Protocol 31 on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms and Protocol 37 containing the list provided for in Article 101 to the EEA Agreement [2024/2548]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 181/2024

On 5 July 2024, the EEA Joint Committee adopted Decision No 181/2024, amending Protocol 31 and Protocol 37 of the EEA Agreement. This decision aims to enhance cooperation among Contracting Parties by incorporating Regulation (EU) 2022/2371, which addresses serious cross-border threats to health and repeals the previous Decision No 1082/2013/EU.

Key Provisions

Article 1

Article 1 modifies the ninth indent of Article 16 in Protocol 31, replacing the reference to Decision No 1082/2013/EU with the new Regulation (EU) 2022/2371. This regulation is crucial as it provides a framework for managing serious health threats that cross national borders.
Additionally, it stipulates that the EFTA States will have full participation in the Health Security Committee, enjoying the same rights and obligations as EU Member States, with the exception of the voting right. This inclusion underscores the importance of collaborative health security efforts in the EEA region.

Article 2

Article 2 introduces a new point in Protocol 37, specifically acknowledging the Health Security Committee as established under Regulation (EU) 2022/2371. This formal recognition is essential for the operationalization of health security measures across the EEA.

Article 3

Article 3 states that this Decision will come into force the day after the last notification is made as per Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This provision ensures a timely implementation of the decision within the framework of the EEA.

Article 4

Article 4 mandates the publication of this Decision in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the legal text to all stakeholders.

Conclusion

This Decision marks a significant step in enhancing health security collaboration within the EEA, particularly in light of increasing global health threats. By aligning with the latest EU regulations, the EEA Joint Committee aims to strengthen the collective response to health emergencies across the region.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 170/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XII (Free movement of capital) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2537]

Overview of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 170/2024

The EEA Joint Committee Decision No 170/2024, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex XII (Free movement of capital) of the EEA Agreement to incorporate Regulation (EU) 2021/1230 concerning cross-border payments within the Union. This decision is significant as it updates the EEA Agreement to reflect changes in EU legislation, specifically replacing the previous Regulation (EC) No 924/2009.

Key Provisions

• Replacement of Regulation: The decision replaces point 3 of Annex XII regarding Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 with the new Regulation (EU) 2021/1230. This new regulation aims to enhance the efficiency and transparency of cross-border payments, making them more accessible to consumers and businesses.
• Definition of Micro-Enterprise: The decision provides a specific definition of ‘micro-enterprise’ within the context of the regulation, clarifying that it includes entities engaged in economic activities, such as self-employed persons and family businesses, with particular thresholds for employee count and financial turnover.
• Transitional Provisions for EFTA States: The decision outlines a phased application of certain articles for the EFTA States, indicating that Articles 4(1) to (4) and 5 will apply one year after the decision’s entry into force, while Articles 4(5) and (6) will apply two years later. This staggered implementation allows for a smoother transition to the new regulation.
• Adaptation of Currency References: In Article 4(5), the term “Union currency” is adapted to refer to the “official currency of the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement,” ensuring clarity and consistency in the context of EFTA States.
• Authenticity of Translations: The decision mandates that the text of Regulation (EU) 2021/1230 be published authentically in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages in the EEA Supplement, ensuring that all EEA countries have access to the regulation in their official languages.
• Entry into Force: The decision will come into effect on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of necessary notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication Requirement: The decision stipulates that it will be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility to the public.

Conclusion

This decision by the EEA Joint Committee reflects the ongoing integration of EU legislation into the EEA framework, particularly in the area of financial services and cross-border payments. By updating the relevant provisions, the EEA aims to ensure that its member states are aligned with the latest EU standards, promoting smoother financial transactions across borders.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 157/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2536]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 157/2024

On July 5, 2024, the EEA Joint Committee adopted Decision No 157/2024, which amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement concerning technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification. This amendment specifically incorporates Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/843 into the EEA Agreement. This regulation addresses corrections to the Portuguese language version of Annexes II and III to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008, which pertains to food additives.

Key Provisions:

• Incorporation of Regulation: The Decision adds a new indent to point 54zzzzr of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement, specifically citing Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/843.
• Exclusion of Liechtenstein: The legislation regarding foodstuffs, as outlined in this Decision, does not apply to Liechtenstein. This is due to the extension of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products to Liechtenstein.
• Authenticity of Texts: The Decision stipulates that the texts of Regulation (EU) 2024/843 in Icelandic and Norwegian shall be considered authentic and will be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.
• Entry into Force: The Decision will come into effect on July 6, 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as per Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication: The Decision mandates publication in the EEA Section of the Official Journal of the European Union, as well as in the EEA Supplement.

This Decision reflects ongoing efforts to harmonize regulations within the EEA, ensuring that member states adhere to updated standards regarding food additives while recognizing specific agreements that affect individual member states like Liechtenstein.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 172/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2560]

Overview of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 172/2024

This decision, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex XIII (Transport) of the EEA Agreement to incorporate Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1754. This regulation, dated 11 September 2023, corrects the German language version of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, which outlines the technical requirements and administrative procedures related to air operations as set forth under Regulation (EC) No 216/2008.

Key Provisions of the Decision

• Article 1: An addition is made to point 66nf of Annex XIII, specifying the inclusion of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1754. This signifies the formal recognition of the regulation within the EEA framework, ensuring that the corrected German version is applicable across the EEA member states.
• Article 2: The text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1754 will be published in both Icelandic and Norwegian languages, which will hold authentic status. This ensures that all EEA countries have access to the regulation in their official languages, promoting transparency and understanding of the legal text.
• Article 3: The decision will come into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as per Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement. This procedural step is crucial for the decision’s legal validity and implementation.
• Article 4: The decision mandates that it be published in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring that it is accessible to all stakeholders and the public.

The adoption of this decision reflects the ongoing efforts to harmonize aviation regulations within the EEA, ensuring that all member states adhere to the same technical and administrative standards for air operations.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 156/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2535]

Overview of EEA Joint Committee Decision No 156/2024

The EEA Joint Committee has adopted Decision No 156/2024 on July 5, 2024, which amends Annex II of the EEA Agreement concerning technical regulations, standards, testing, and certification related to foodstuffs.

Key Provisions of the Decision

Incorporation of Regulations

This Decision incorporates two specific regulations into the EEA Agreement:

• Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/346 of January 22, 2024, which amends previous regulations regarding the use of trimagnesium dicitrate in food supplements.
• Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/374 of January 24, 2024, which modifies the title of food categories for alcoholic beverages and addresses the use of various additives in certain alcoholic beverages.

Exemption for Liechtenstein

It is specified that this Decision does not apply to Liechtenstein. This exemption is based on the existing Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation concerning trade in agricultural products, which is extended to Liechtenstein.

Amendments to Annex II

The Decision amends Chapter XII of Annex II to include the following:

• In point 54zzzzr, new entries for the above-mentioned regulations are added, detailing their publication references in the Official Journal.
• In point 69, a similar entry is added for Regulation (EU) 2024/346.

Authenticity of Texts

The texts of the Regulations in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages will be authentic and published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.

Entry into Force

This Decision is set to enter into force on July 6, 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as prescribed under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.

Publication

Finally, the Decision will be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement of the Official Journal of the European Union.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 150/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2528]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 150/2024

This decision, adopted on 5 July 2024, amends Annex I of the EEA Agreement, specifically concerning veterinary and phytosanitary matters. It incorporates Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2618, which was published on 24 November 2023. This regulation pertains to the approval or withdrawal of disease-free status for certain Member States or zones regarding specific listed diseases, as well as the approval of eradication programmes for these diseases.

Key Provisions

• Incorporation of Regulation: The decision incorporates the aforementioned regulation into the EEA Agreement, ensuring that the relevant veterinary legislation is applicable within the EEA framework.
• Exemption for Liechtenstein: It specifies that the veterinary matters legislation will not apply to Liechtenstein, as long as the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein. This is a critical detail that maintains the unique trading arrangements Liechtenstein has with Switzerland.
• Amendment Details: Article 1 of the decision adds a new indent in point 13r of Part 1.1 of Chapter I in Annex I to the EEA Agreement, specifically referencing the new Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2618.
• Authenticity of Texts: Article 2 states that the text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/2618 will be published in both Icelandic and Norwegian languages, affirming the multilingual nature of the EEA Agreement.
• Entry into Force: Article 3 clarifies that the decision will enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of notifications required under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication Requirements: Article 4 mandates the publication of this decision in the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the legal text.

This decision reflects the ongoing cooperation between EEA member states in the realm of veterinary and phytosanitary legislation, reinforcing standards and protocols for disease management across the region.

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 149/2024 of 5 July 2024 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement [2024/2527]

Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 149/2024

This Decision amends Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement, based on the provisions of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA Agreement), specifically Article 98.

Key Provisions

• Incorporation of Commission Implementing Regulation: The Decision incorporates Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/566, which pertains to the approval or withdrawal of disease-free status for certain zones in Germany and Spain concerning the bluetongue virus. This regulation also includes the approval of an extension of an eradication programme for the virus.
• Exemption for Liechtenstein: The Decision specifies that legislation regarding veterinary matters does not apply to Liechtenstein as long as the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products is extended to Liechtenstein. This means the provisions of this Decision will not impact Liechtenstein.
• Amendment of Annex I: The Decision mandates the amendment of Annex I to the EEA Agreement to include a new entry regarding Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/566. This entry will be added under point 13r in Part 1.1 of Chapter I of Annex I.
• Authenticity of Translations: The text of the Implementing Regulation in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages will be considered authentic and is to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union.
• Entry into Force: The Decision is set to enter into force on 6 July 2024, contingent upon the completion of all necessary notifications as specified under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement.
• Publication Requirement: The Decision will be published in both the EEA Section and the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, ensuring transparency and accessibility of the information.

This Decision reflects ongoing efforts to maintain veterinary health standards and manage animal diseases within the European Economic Area, while also recognizing the unique arrangements applicable to Liechtenstein.

EFTA Surveillance Authority – Decision No 142/24/COL of 18 September 2024 to open a formal investigation into alleged State aid in purchasing of medical imaging services from two companies in Iceland

EFTA Surveillance Authority – Decision No 142/24/COL

The EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) has opened a formal investigation into potential State aid concerning the purchasing of medical imaging services by the Icelandic Health Insurance (IHI) from two private companies, Læknisfræðileg Myndgreining ehf. (LM) and Íslensk Myndgreining ehf. (ÍM). This decision arises from a complaint received on May 30, 2023, alleging that the agreements between IHI and these companies may have conferred unlawful State aid, as the fees paid by IHI to LM and ÍM are reportedly around 15% higher than those paid to another provider, Myndgreiningarrannsóknarstöð Hjartaverndar (MH), for the same services.

Summary of the Procedure

ESA’s investigation follows a detailed procedural timeline, including the initial complaint, communications with Icelandic authorities, and subsequent inquiries for additional information. The Icelandic authorities have defended the agreements by classifying the services as non-economic activities under the Services of General Interest (SGI) framework, arguing that these do not fall within the scope of State aid rules.

Details of the Agreements

The investigation focuses on contracts between IHI and LM and ÍM for medical imaging services, which have been in place since the 1990s and were not established through a competitive tender process. In contrast, the contract with MH was awarded following a tender in 2017. The complainants assert that the pricing practices between these entities create an unfair competitive advantage for LM and ÍM, alleging that IHI’s payments constitute State aid because they exceed what would be considered fair market value.

Preliminary Assessment of State Aid

ESA’s preliminary assessment indicates that the agreements could meet the criteria for State aid as outlined in Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. The authority notes that for a measure to be classified as State aid, it must be granted by the State or through State resources, provide an advantage to certain undertakings, and distort competition while affecting trade. The Icelandic authorities argue that the payments do not constitute State aid as they claim these services are provided in the public interest and fall outside economic activity.

Compatibility Assessment

ESA has expressed doubts regarding the compatibility of the measures with EEA rules, especially since the Icelandic authorities have not submitted any information to demonstrate that the payments to LM and ÍM are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. The lack of a competitive tender process raises concerns about the fairness and transparency of the agreements.

Conclusion

In conclusion, ESA’s decision to open a formal investigation stems from significant concerns regarding potential State aid in the medical imaging services sector in Iceland. The authority invites comments from interested parties, which will be considered in the ongoing assessment of the agreements in question. The investigation will explore whether the measures constitute State aid and whether they can be deemed compatible with EEA rules, focusing on the implications for competition and trade within the EEA.

Interested parties are encouraged to submit their comments within one month from the publication date of this decision. The identities of those who submit comments may be withheld upon written request, ensuring that the investigation can proceed with due diligence while respecting the confidentiality of contributors.[:]