ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
(2)

Article 4(1), first indent, of Directive 90/435, read in combination with Article 4(2) thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not oblige Member States necessarily to allow profits distributed to a parent company established in that State by its subsidiary with its seat in another Member State to be wholly deductible from the profits of the taxable period of the parent company and that it be possible for the resulting loss to be carried forward to a subsequent taxable period. It is for the Member States to estalbish, taking account both of the needs of their domestic legal system and the option provided for in Article 4(2), the method by which the result prescribed in Article 4(1), first indent, is achieved. However, where a Member State has chosen the exemption system provided for in Article 4(1), first indent, of Directive 90/435 and, in principle, the legislation of that Member State allows losses to be carried forward to subsequent taxable periods, that provision precludes legislation of a Member State which has the effect of limiting, to the amount of the dividends received, the losses of the parent company which may be carried forward.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 19/10

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 24 October 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Première Instance d'Arlon — Belgium) — Vandermeir v État belge — SPF Finances

(Case C-364/08) (1)

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Freedom of establishment - Article 43 EC - Freedom to provide services - Article 49 EC - Motor vehicles - Use by a person residing in a Member State of a motor vehicle registered in another Member State - Taxation of that vehicle in the first Member State)

(2009/C 19/17)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de Première Instance d'Arlon

Parties

Applicant: Marc Vandermeir

Defendant: État belge — SPF Finances

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal de Première Instance d'Arlon — Interpretation of Article 43 and/or Article 49 EC — National provision of a Member State which requires a self-employed worker residing in that State to register his vehicle there which is already registered in another Member State in which he exercises his independent professional activity — Restriction on the freedom of establishment and/or to provide services

Operative part

Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as prohibiting national legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, according to which a self-employed worker residing in that Member State is required to register there a vehicle leased from a company established in another Member State, when it is not intended that that vehicle should be used primarily in the first Member State on a permanent basis and it is not, in fact, used in that manner.

(1) OJ C 260, 11.10.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 285/14

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 July 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid (Spain)) — Real Sociedad de Fútbol SAD, Nihat Kahveci v Consejo Superior de Deportes, Real Federación Española de Fútbol

(Case C-152/08) (1)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Article 37 of the Additional Protocol - Direct effect - Working conditions - Principle of non-discrimination - Football - Limit on the number of professional players from non-member States nationals who may be fielded per team in national competitions)

(2008/C 285/23)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid

Parties

Applicants: Real Sociedad de Fútbol SAD, Nihat Kahveci

Defendants: Consejo Superior de Deportes, Real Federación Española de Fútbol

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid — Interpretation of Art. 37 of the Additional Protocol to the EEC-Turkey Association Agreement signed on 23 November 1970 in Brussels and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972 (OJ 1973 C 133, p. 17) — Working conditions — Rules laid down by sporting associations limiting the participation in certain competitions of professional players who are nationals of non-Member countries who are not parties to the EEA Agreement — Turkish professional sportsman with a work permit for access to the profession and a residence permit as required by national law.

Operative part of the order

The prohibition on all discrimination against Turkish workers duly registered as belonging to the labour market of the Member States as regards remuneration and other conditions of work, as laid down by Article 37 of the Additional Protocol, signed on 23 November 1970 in Brussels and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972, annexed to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey signed at Ankara on 12 September 1963 by the Republic of Turkey, on the one part, and by the Member States of the EEC and the Community, on the other part, and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 64/732/EEC of 23 December 1963 and Article 10(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council of 19 September 1980 on the development of the Association, must be interpreted as precluding the application to a professional sportsman of Turkish nationality legally employed by a club established in a Member State, of a rule laid down by a sports association in that State, according to which clubs are authorised to field in competitions organised at national level only a limited number of players from non-member States which are not parties to the Agreement on the European Economic Area.

(1) OJ C 171, 5.7.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 69/31

Order of the President of the Court of 4 November 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-26/08) (1)

(2009/C 69/63)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 69/31

Order of the President of the Court of 10 November 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-82/08) (1)

(2009/C 69/65)

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 113/16

Order of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 February 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België — Belgium) — UDV North America Inc v Brandtraders NV

(Case C-62/08) (1)

(Article 104(3), second subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 9(1)(a) and (2)(d) - Right of the proprietor of a registered mark to prevent the use by a third party of a sign which is identical to the mark - Concept of ‘use’ - Use of a sign which is identical to the mark by a trade intermediary in its business papers - Intermediary acting in its own name but on behalf of a vendor)

2009/C 113/31

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: UDV North America Inc

Defendant: Brandtraders NV

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hof van Cassatie van België — Interpretation of Article 9(1) and 2(d) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1) — Right of the proprietor of a mark to oppose its use by a third party — Concept of use of the mark.

Operative part of the order

The concept of ‘use’ for the purpose of Article 9(1)(a) and (2)(d) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark covers a situation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in which a trade intermediary, which is acting in its own name but on behalf of the vendor and is thus not an interested party in relation to trade in goods in which it is itself a contractual party, uses, in its business papers, a sign which is identical with a Community trade mark in relation to goods or services which are identical with those for which the mark is registered.

(1) OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 113/17

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 30 January 2009 — Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-131/08) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(b) - Application for word mark SAFETY 1ST - Lack of distinctive character - Refusal of registration)

2009/C 113/33

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. (represented by: G. Simon, Rechtsanwältin)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agent)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 24 January 2008 in Case T-88/06 Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) by which the Court dismissed an action for annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 11 January 2006 (Case R 616/2004-2) dismissing the appeal against the examiner’s decision which refused to register the word mark ‘SAFETY 1ST’ for goods in Classes 12, 20, 21 and 28 — Distinctive character of a trade mark — Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 158, 21.6.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 167/7

Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 2 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-312/08) (1)

2009/C 167/15

Language of the case: English

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 223, 30.08.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 141/34

Order of the President of the Court of 13 January 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-112/08) (1)

2009/C 141/62

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 128, 24.5.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 220/16

Order of the Court of 30 April 2009 — Japan Tobacco, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), Torrefacção Camelo Lda

(Case C-136/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(5) - Detrimental to the distinctive character of the earlier mark - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier mark - Likelihood - Application for registration of the figurative sign ‘CAMELO’ as a Community trade mark - Opposition by the proprietor of the national word and figurative marks CAMEL)

2009/C 220/27

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Japan Tobacco, Inc. (represented by: A. Ortiz López, S. Ferrandis González and E. Ochoa Santamaría, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent), Torrefacçao Camelo Lda

Re:

Appeal against the judgment in Case T-128/06 Japan Tobacco v OHIM and Torrefacçao Camelo by which the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) dismissed the action brought by Japan Tobacco for annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 February 2006 in opposition proceedings between Japan Tobacco and Torrefacçao Camelo — Infringement of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1) — Relative grounds for refusal to register a trade mark — Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character of an earlier trade mark, or detrimental to that distinctive character

Operative part of the order

1. Dismisses the appeal.

2. Orders Japan Tobacco, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 209, 15.8.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 205/16

Order of the Court of 5 May 2009 — Atlantic Dawn and Others v Commission of the European Communities, Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-372/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 147/2007 - Reduction in mackerel quotas allocated to Ireland for years 2007 to 2012 - Action for annulment of Regulation No 147/2007 brought by a group of Irish fishermen comprising 20 out of 23 licence holders from the Refrigerated Sea Water pelagic fleet - Inadmissibility - Appeal clearly unfounded)

2009/C 205/29

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Atlantic Dawn Ltd, Antarctic Fishing Co. Ltd, Atlantean Ltd, Killybegs Fishing Enterprises Ltd, Doyle Fishing Co. Ltd, Western Seaboard Fishing Co. Ltd, O’Shea Fishing Co. Ltd, Aine Fishing Co. Ltd, Brendelen Ltd, Cavankee Fishing Co. Ltd, Ocean Trawlers Ltd, Eileen Oglesby, Noel McGing, Mullglen Ltd, Bradan Fishing Co. Ltd, Larry Murphy, Pauric Conneely, Thomas Flaherty, Carmarose Trawling Co. Ltd, Colmcille Fishing Ltd (represented by: G. Hogan, SC, N. Travers, BL, T. O’Sullivan, BL, and D. Barry, solicitor)

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Banks, Agent), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: N. Díaz Abad, Agent)

Re:

Appeal against the order of 2 June 2008 in Case T-172/07 Atlantic Dawn and Others v Commission by which the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) declared inadmissible an action for the annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 147/2007 of 15 February 2007 adapting certain fish quotas from 2007 to 2012 pursuant to Article 23(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy — Requirement that the contested measure must be of direct concern

Operative part of the order

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Atlantic Dawn Ltd, Antarctic Fishing Co. Ltd, Atlantean Ltd, Killybegs Fishing Enterprises Ltd, Doyle Fishing Co. Ltd, Western Seaboard Fishing Co. Ltd, O’Shea Fishing Co. Ltd, Aine Fishing Co. Ltd, Brendelen Ltd, Cavankee Fishing Co. Ltd, Ocean Trawlers Ltd, Eileen Oglesby, Noel McGing, Mullglen Ltd, Bradan Fishing Co. Ltd, Larry Murphy, Pauric Conneely, Thomas Flaherty, Carmarose Trawling Co. Ltd and Colmcille Fishing Ltd to pay their own costs.

(1) OJ C 285, 08.11.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 11/19

Order of the President of the Court of 17 September 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-357/08) (1)

2010/C 11/34

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.9.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/32

Order of the President of the Court of 8 July 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-509/08) (1)

2009/C 282/57

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/19

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 December 2009 — Prana Haus GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-494/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Word mark PRANAHAUS — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character - Appeal manifestly inadmissible in part and manifestly unfounded in part)

2010/C 63/28

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Prana Haus GmbH (represented by: N. Hebeis, Rechtsanwalt)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Weberndörfer, Agent)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 17 September 2008 in Case T-226/07 Prana Haus GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) by which the Court of First Instance dismissed the action for annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 April 2007 dismissing the appeal against the Examiner's decision to refuse registration of the word mark PRANAHAUS for goods and services in classes 9, 16 and 35 — Descriptive character of the mark

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Prana Haus GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/27

Order of the President of the Court of 17 November 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Cyprus

(Case C-466/08) (1)

2010/C 51/44

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 327, 20.12.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/13

Order of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landessozialgericht Berlin, Germany) — Christel Reinke v AOK Berlin

(Case C-336/08) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - No need to adjudicate)

2011/C 63/24

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landessozialgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Christel Reinke

Respondent: AOK Berlin

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landessozialgericht Berlin-Brandenburg — Interpretation of Articles 18 EC, 49 EC and 50 EC and Article 34(4) and (5) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 of 21 March 1972 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and to their families moving within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1972(I), p. 159) — Reimbursement of medical costs incurred in connection with emergency treatment of a national of a Member State in a private hospital of another Member State as a result of the refusal of the competent public hospital to provide that benefit on the ground of insufficient capacity — National legislation of the competent Member State excluding reimbursement of medical costs incurred for emergency treatment in a private hospital of another Member State but allowing reimbursement of those costs if charged by a private hospital situated in national territory

Operative part of the order

There is no need to reply to the reference for a preliminary ruling made by the Landessozialgericht Berlin-Brandenburg (Germany) by decision of 27 June 2008.

(1) OJ C 260, 11.10.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 134/9

Order of the Court of 9 December 2009 — Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission

(Case C-432/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Officials - Social security - Payment of medical expenses - Implied rejection of the application seeking reimbursement in full of medical expenses incurred by the applicant - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

2010/C 134/15

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (represented by: G. Cipressa, avvocato)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, acting as Agents, and A. dal Ferro, avvocato)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 9 July 2008 in Joined Cases T-296/05 and T-408/05 Marcuccio v Commission, by which the Court dismissed as inadmissible the application for annulment of two implied decisions of the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the European Communities refusing to pay 100 % of certain medical costs incurred by the applicant and an application for an order that the Commission pay to the applicant amounts in respect of certain medical costs

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Marcuccio is ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.

(1) OJ C 313, 6.12.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 312/10

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 1 July 2009 — Handelsmaatschappij J. van Hilst and Others v The Jaguar Collection Limited and Others

(Case C-238/09)

2009/C 312/15

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Handelsmaatschappij J. van Hilst and Others

Defendants: The Jaguar Collection Limited and Others

By order of 20 July 2009 the case was removed from the Register of the Court of Justice
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/44

Order of the President of the Court of 24 November 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-121/09) (1)

2010/C 63/73

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 141, 20.6.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/28

Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 26 November 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-15/09) (1)

2010/C 51/47

Language of the case: Czech

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 69, 21.3.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 148/10

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 February 2010 — Volker Mergel, Klaus Kampfenkel, Burkart Bill, Andreas Herden v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-80/09 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(c) - Refusal to register - Word mark Patentconsult - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

2010/C 148/16

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellants: Volker Mergel, Klaus Kampfenkel, Burkart Bill, Andreas Herden (represented by: G.P. Friderichs, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schäffner, acting as Agent)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 16 December 2008 in Case T-335/07 Mergel and Others v OHIM, by which the Court dismissed the action for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 June 2007, dismissing the action against the decision of the examiner to refuse the registration of the Community word mark ‘Patentconsult’ for the goods and services within Classes 35, 41 and 42 — Distinctive character of a mark which consists exclusively of signs or indications which may serve, in trade, to designate the characteristics of the goods or services concerned

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Mergel, Kampfenkel, Bill and Herden to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 90, 18.4.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 100/34

Order of the President of the Court of 18 January 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Estonia

(Case C-328/09) (1)

2010/C 100/51

Language of the case: Estonian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 297, 5.12.2009.