ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 73/13

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 December 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Alba, Romania) — Corpul Național al Polițiștilor v Ministerul Administrației și Internelor (MAI), Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române (IGPR), Inspectoratul de Poliție al Județului Alba (IPJ)

(Case C-434/11) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Admissibility of national legislation providing for salary reductions in relation to various categories of public officials - Failure to implement European Union law - Court clearly lacking jurisdiction)

2012/C 73/22

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Alba

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Corpul Național al Polițiștilor

Defendants: Ministerul Administrației și Internelor (MAI), Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române (IGPR), Inspectoratul de Poliție al Județului Alba (IPJ)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunalul Alba — Interpretation of Article 17(1), 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Admissibility of national legislation providing for salary reductions in relation to various categories of public officials — Infringement of the right to property and the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly lacks jurisdiction to reply to the question referred by the Tribunalul Alba, Romania, by decision of 28 July 2011.

(1) OJ C 331, 12.11.2011.
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 21 September 2011 — Longevity Health Products, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Biofarma SA

(Case C-316/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM - Failure to comply with the obligation to pay the appeal fee within the period prescribed - Decision of the Board of Appeal declaring that the appeal is deemed not to have been filed)

(2012/C 25/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Longevity Health Products, Inc. (represented by: J. Korab, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Biofarma SA

Re:

Appeal against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 15 April 2011 in Case T-96/11 Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Biofarma by which that court dismissed an action brought by the applicant for word mark ‘VITACHRON FEMALE’ for goods and services in, inter alia, class 5 against Decision R 1357/2010-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 10 January 2011, declaring that the appeal against the Opposition Division’s decision — which refused registration of that mark in the opposition proceedings brought by the proprietor of the national marks ‘VITATHION’ for goods and services in class 5 — was deemed not to have been filed since the appeal fee had not been paid within the time-limit.

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Longevity Health Products, Inc. shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.9.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 109/8

Order of the President of the Court of 31 January 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Oldenburg — Germany) — Johann Bilker, Heidrun Ohle, Ursula Kohls-Ohle v EWE AG

(Case C-8/11) (1)

2012/C 109/18

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 113, 9.4.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/5

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 March 2012 — Maurice Emram v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Guccio Gucci SpA

(Case C-354/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Application for registration of the figurative mark G - Trade marks)

2012/C 235/07

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Maurice Emram (represented by: M. Benavï, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent), Guccio Gucci SpA (represented by: F. Jacobacci, avvocato)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 10 May 2011 in Case T-187/10 Emram v OHIM dismissing the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 February 2010 (Case R 1281/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Guccio Gucci SpA and Mr Emram — Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Application for Community figurative mark G — Likelihood of confusion — Distortion of the evidence — Incorrect assessment of the distinctive character — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Emram shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/21

Order of the President of the Court of 8 May 2012 — ThyssenKrupp Elevator AG v European Commission

(Case C-505/11 P) (1)

2012/C 303/40

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 133/12

Order of the Court of 7 February 2012 — Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA v European Commission

(Case C-421/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Competition - Cartel - Market for methacrylates - Concept of ‘undertaking’ - Presumption of decisive influence - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of sound administration - Extension of the authority of a final decision - Deterrent multiplying factor - Indivisible nature of the fine - Unlimited jurisdiction)

2012/C 133/21

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA (represented by: E. Morgan de Rivery and A. Noël-Baron, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and B. Gencarelli, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 June 2011 in Case T-206/06 Total and Elf Aquitaine v Commission, in which the General Court dismissed the action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.645 — Methacrylates) — Competition — Cartel — Infringement of the principles of conferral of powers and proportionality — Manifestly erroneous interpretation — Infringement of the rights of the defence, the principle of fairness and the principle of equality of arms — Obligation to state reasons — Infringement of the principle of sound administration

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 303/21

Order of the President of the Court of 11 July 2012 — European Commission v Czech Republic

(Case C-353/11) (1)

2012/C 303/37

Language of the case: Czech

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

(1) OJ C 252, 27.8.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 366/20

Order of the Court of 15 June 2012 — United Technologies Corp. v European Commission

(Case C-493/11 P) (1)

(Appeals - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for the installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators - Fines - Parent company and subsidiaries - Imputability of the unlawful conduct)

2012/C 366/35

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: United Technologies Corp. (represented by: A. Winckler and D. Gerard, lawyers, and by J. Temple Lang and C. Cook, Solicitors)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet, R. Sauer and J. Bourke, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 July 2011 in Joined Cases T-141/07, T-142/07, T-145/07 and T-146/07 General Technic-Otis and Others v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed an action for the partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 512 final of 21 February 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/E-1/38.823 — Elevators and Escalators), concerning a cartel in the market for the installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators in Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, concerning bid-rigging, market-sharing, price-fixing, the awarding of projects and contracts related thereto and exchange of information, and, in the alternative, for the annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant — Liability of a parent company for infringements of the competition rules committed by its subsidiaries

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. United Technologies Corporation shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 101/3

Order of the Court of 4 October 2012 — Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE v European Commission

(Case C-597/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Public contract awarded by the Commission - Rejection of a tender - Obligation to state reasons - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 - Article 89 - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 - Articles 140 and 141 - Period allowed for the receipt of tenders - Period allowed for the submission of requests for information)

2013/C 101/06

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, Δικηγόρος)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin, Agent)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 9 September 2011 in Case T-232/06 Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission dismissing an application for annulment of the Commission Decision of 19 June 2006 rejecting the tender submitted by the present appellant in response to call for tenders TAXUD/2005/AO-001 concerning the specification, development, maintenance and support of customs IT systems for DG TAXUD (OJ 2005, S 117-115222), and the decision to award the contract to another tenderer

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 101/2

Order of the Court of 13 September 2012 — Total SA, Elf Aquitaine SA v European Commission

(Case C-495/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Infringement of the principles of conferred powers and of proportionality - Manifestly incorrect interpretation - Infringement of the rights of the defence and of the principles of equity and of the equality of arms - Obligation to state reasons)

2013/C 101/03

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Total SA, Elf Aquitaine SA (represented by: E. Morgan de Rivery and A. Noël-Baron, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Gencarelli, P. Van Nuffel and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 14 July 2011 in Case T-190/06 Total and Elf Aquitaine v Commission by which that Court dismissed the action for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 1766 final of 3 May 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.620 — Hydrogen peroxide and perborate) — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Infringement of the principles of conferred powers and of proportionality — Manifestly incorrect interpretation — Infringement of the rights of the defence and of the principles of equity and of the equality of arms — Obligation to state reasons

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 3.12.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 108/18

Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 8 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Palermo — Sezione di Bagheria — Italy) — Paola Galioto v Maria Guccione, Maria Savona and Fabio Savona

(Case C-464/11) (1)

2013/C 108/38

Language of the case: Italian

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

(1) OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/10

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 November 2012 — Luigi Marcuccio v European Commission

(Case C-1/11 SA) (1)

(Application for leave to serve a garnishee order on the European Union)

2013/C 38/12

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Protocol on privileges and immunities — Application for leave to serve a garnishee order on the Commission in respect of sums owing to the European Union by the Italian Republic and, in the alternative, in respect of movable property belonging to the European Union held in the Italian Republic — Waiver of the Commission’s immunity — Article 1 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union

Operative part of the order

1. The application for a garnishee order is dismissed.

2. Mr Luigi Marcuccio and the European Commission are ordered to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 304/8

Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 24 July 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-468/11) (1)

2013/C 304/14

Language of the case: Spanish

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

(1) OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 108/6

Order of the Court of 10 January 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas Senāts) — Ilgvars Brunovskis v Lauku atbalsta dienests

(Case C-650/11) (1)

(Common agricultural policy - Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 - Implementation of support schemes in the new Member States - Complementary national direct payments - Conditions for grant - Regulation (EC) No 1973/2004 - Inapplicable)

2013/C 108/11

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas Senāts

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ilgvars Brunovskis

Defendant: Lauku atbalsta dienests

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Interpretation of Article 125(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 (OJ 2003 L 270, p. 1) and Article 102(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1973/2004 of 29 October 2004 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 as regards the support schemes provided for in Titles IV and IVa of that Regulation and the use of land set aside for the production of raw materials (OJ 2003 L 345, p. 1) — Suckler cow premium — National rules providing for the grant of the premium by full calendar year only for suckler cows and heffers registered as eligible for the premium by 1 July at the latest in the relevant calendar year — Whether or not all suckler cows taken into consideration in the calendar year concerned

Operative part of the order

European Union law and, in particular, Article 143(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national rules, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, governing certain complementary national direct payments linked to the presence of suckler cows in a herd and making the grant of those payments conditional on a declaration made before 1 July of the year concerned, even though cows which become suckler cows after that date cannot be taken into account.

(1) OJ C 49, 18.2.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 101/14

Order of the President of the Court of 4 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov — Slovakia) — Valeria Marcinová v Pohotovst’ s.r.o.

(Case C-30/12) (1)

2013/C 101/29

Language of the case: Slovak

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

(1) OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/12

Order of the President of the Court of 19 April 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Trianon Productie BV v Revillon Chocolatier SAS

(Case C-2/12) (1)

2012/C 235/30

Language of the case: Dutch

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

(1) OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 108/19

Order of the President of the Court of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Nienburg — Germany) — Heinz Kassner v Mittelweser-Tiefbau GmbH & Co KG

(Case C-311/12) (1)

2013/C 108/48

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/17

Order of the President of the Court of 6 November 2012 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg Megyei Bíróság — (Hungary)) — Körös-vidéki Környezetvédelmi és Vízügyi Igazgatóság (C-33/12), Felső-Tisza-vidéki Környezetvédelmi és Vízügyi Igazgatóság (C-38/12) v Mezőgazdasági és Vidékfejlesztési Hivatal Központi Szerve

(Joined Cases C-33/12 and C-38/12) (1)

2013/C 38/26

Language of the case: Hungarian

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

(1) OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 108/8

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Burgos — Spain) — La Retoucherie de Manuela S. L. v La Retoucherie de Burgos S. C.

(Case C-117/12) (1)

(Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Competition - Agreements between undertakings - Article 81 EC - Block exemption for vertical agreements - Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 - Article 5(b) - Non-compete obligation imposed on the buyer upon expiry of a franchise agreement - Premises and land from which the buyer has operated during the contract period)

2013/C 108/16

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Burgos

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: La Retoucherie de Manuela S. L.

Defendant: La Retoucherie de Burgos S. C.

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Audiencia Provincial de Burgos — Interpretation of Article 5(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices (OJ 1999 L 336, p. 21) — Block exemption — Distortions of competition not exempt — Conditions imposed on the buyer upon expiry of the franchise agreement — Concept of ‘premises and land from which the buyer has operated during the contract period’

Operative part of the order

Article 5(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of Article 81(3) [EC] to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices, must be interpreted as meaning that the words ‘premises and land from which the buyer has operated during the contract period’ refers only to the place from which the contract goods or services are offered for sale and not to the whole of the territory in which those goods or services may be sold under a franchise agreement.

(1) OJ C 151, 26.5.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/5

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 7 March 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van Koophandel te Gent — Belgium) — Euronics Belgium CVBA v Kamera Express BV, Kamera Express Belgium BVBA

(Case C-343/12) (1)

(Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Directive 2005/29/EC - National legislation laying down a general prohibition of offering for sale or selling goods at a loss)

2013/C 129/09

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van Koophandel te Gent

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Euronics Belgium CVBA

Defendants: Kamera Express BV, Kamera Express Belgium BVBA

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank van Koophandel te Gent — Belgium — Interpretation of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22) — National legislation laying down a general prohibition of sales at a loss, without exception, and intended to protect, inter alia, the interests of consumers — Compatibility with Directive 2005/29

Operative part of the order

Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) must be interpreted as precluding a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides for a general prohibition of offering for sale or selling at a loss in so far as that provision pursues objectives relating to consumer protection.

(1) OJ C 303, 6.10.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 225/59

Order of the President of the Court of 11 April 2013 — Shell Petroleum NV, The Shell Transport and Trading Company Ltd, Shell Nederland Verkoopmaatschappij BV v European Commission

(Case C-585/12) (1)

2013/C 225/129

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.