ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 195/16

Order of the President of the Court of 21 April 2010 — BCS SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Deere & Company

(Case C-553/09 P) (1)

2010/C 195/25

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.
3.

In circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, the failure to mention the APR in a consumer credit contract, the mention of the APR being essential information in the context of Directive 87/102/EEC of 22 December 1986 for the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning consumer credit, as amended by Directive 98/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998, may be a decisive factor in the assessment by a national court of whether a term of a consumer credit agreement concerning the cost of that credit in which no such mention is made is written in plain, intelligible language within the meaning of Article 4 of Directive 93/13. If that is not the case, that court has the power to assess, of its own motion, whether, in the light of all the circumstances attending the conclusion of that contract, the failure to mention the APR in the term of that contract concerning the cost of that credit is likely to confer on that term an unfair nature within the meaning of Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 93/13. However, notwithstanding the power which is given to assess that contract in the light of Directive 93/13, Directive 87/102 is to be interpreted as allowing national courts to apply of their own motion the provisions transposing Article 4 of the latter directive into national law and as providing that the failure to mention the APR in a consumer credit contract means that the credit granted is deemed to be interest-free and free of charge.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 346/38

Order of the President of the Court of 19 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție — Romania) — Criminal proceedings v Gheorghe Kita

(Case C-264/10) (1)

()

2010/C 346/74

Language of the case: Romanian

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

(1) OJ C 209, 31.7.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 89/3

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 15 December 2010 — Karen Goncharov v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), DSB

(Case C-156/10 P) (1)

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Marks consisting of acronyms - Earlier trade mark DSB - Word sign ‘DSBW’ - Opposition proceedings - Relative ground for refusal - Examination of the likelihood of confusion - Visual similarity - Aural similarity - Inadmissibility - Assessment of the facts)

2011/C 89/04

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Karen Goncharov (represented by: A. Späth, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: B. Schmidt, acting as Agent), DSB (represented by: T. Graf, Rechtsanwalt)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 January 2010 in Case T-34/07 Goncharov v OHIM — DSB (DSBW) by which the General Court dismissed the action for annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2006, which refused registration of the word sign ‘DSBW’ as a Community trade mark for certain goods in Classes 39, 41 and 43 and upheld the opposition of the proprietor of the earlier Community word mark ‘DSB’ — Likelihood of confusion — Account not taken, during the examination of the likelihood of confusion, of the particularities of marks consisting of acronyms — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Goncharov is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 148, 5.6.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/17

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 7 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bacău — Romania) — SC DRA SPEED SRL v Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Bacău, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Bacău

(Case C-439/10) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Failure to provide a factual description - Inadmissibility)

2011/C 63/32

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Bacău

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC DRA SPEED SRL

Defendant: Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Bacău, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Bacău

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Curtea de Apel Secția Bacău Secția Comercială, Contencios Administrativ și Fiscal — Registration of second-hand vehicles previously registered in another Member State — Environmental tax on vehicles on their first registration in a Member State — Compatibility of the national rules with Article 110 TFEU — Discrimination in relation to second-hand vehicles already registered in the territory of that Member State and not subject to that tax on a subsequent sale or new registration

Operative part of the order

The reference for a preliminary ruling made by the Curtea de Apel Bacău by decision of 1 September 2010 is manifestly inadmissible.

(1) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 173/8

Order of the President of the Court of 16 February 2011 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Berlin — Germany) — Agrargenossenschaft Münchehof e.G. (C-18/10), Landwirtschaftliches Unternehmen e.G. Sondershausen (C-37/10) v BVVG Bodenverwertungs- und -verwaltungs GmbH

(Joined Cases C-18/10 and C-37/10) (1)

2011/C 173/17

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 80, 27.3.2010.

OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 120/10

Order of the President of the Court of 11 January 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Administración General del Estado v Red Nacional de Ferrocarriles Españoles (RENFE)

(Case C-303/10) (1)

2011/C 120/23

Language of the case: Spanish

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

(1) OJ C 246, 11.09.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 211/21

Order of the President of the Seventh Chamber of the Court of 17 March 2011 — European Commission v Republic of Finland

(Case C-380/10) (1)

2011/C 211/44

Language of the case: Swedish

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

(1) OJ C 260, 25.9.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 186/10

Order of the Court of 18 March 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Valenciana (Spain)) — David Montoya Medina v Fondo de Garantia Salarial and Universidad de Alicante

(Case C-273/10) (1)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Clause 4 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work - Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector - Entitlement to triennial seniority bonuses - Principle of non-discrimination)

2011/C 186/16

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Valenciana (Spain)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: David Montoya Medina

Defendants: Fondo de Garantia Salarial and Universidad de Alicante

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Valenciana — Interpretation of Clause 4(4) of the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Contracts of employment as a university lecturer and researcher concluded with State universities — Exclusion of certain benefits from fixed-term contracts

Operative part of the order

Clause 4(1) of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999, which is annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, without any objective justification, restricts the right to receive a seniority bonus to university lecturers on permanent contracts, excluding lecturers on fixed-term contracts where, as regards receipt of that bonus, those two categories of workers are in comparable situations.

(1) OJ C 221, 14.8.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/27

Order of the President of the Eighth Chamber of the Court of 19 May 2011 — European Commission v Slovak Republic

(Case C-253/10) (1)

2011/C 252/54

Language of the case: Slovak

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

(1) OJ C 195, 17.7.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/23

Order of the President of the Court of 17 May 2011 — European Commission v Republic of Poland

(Case C-341/10) (1)

2011/C 232/37

Language of the case: Polish

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

(1) OJ C 260, 25.9.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 311/15

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bacău — Romania) — Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Bacău, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Bacău v Lilia Druțu

(Case C-573/10) (1)

(Article 104(3), first indent of the Rules of Procedure - Internal taxation - Article 110 TFEU - Introduction of a pollution tax on first registration of motor vehicles)

2011/C 311/23

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Bacău

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Bacău, Administrația Finanțelor Publice Bacău

Defendant: Lilia Druțu

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Curtea de Appel Bacău Comercială, Contencios Administrativ și Fiscal — Registration of second-hand vehicles previously registered in other Member States — Environmental tax on motor vehicles on first registration in a Member State — Compatibility of national legislation with Article 110 TFEU — Discrimination compared with second-hand vehicles already registered in that Member State and not subject to that tax on subsequent sale and new registration

Operative part of the order

Article 110 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes a Member State from introducing a pollution tax on motor vehicles on first registration in that Member State if that fiscal measure is set up in such a way as to discourage the placing on the market in that Member State of second-hand vehicles purchased in other Member States without discouraging the purchase of second-hand vehicles of a similar age and condition on the national market.

(1) OJ C 46, 12.2.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/11

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 May 2011 — X Technology Swiss GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-429/10 P) (1)

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Sign consisting of the partial colouring of a product - Orange colouring of the toe of a sock - Absolute ground for refusal - Absence of distinctive character - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(b))

2011/C 252/20

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: X Technology Swiss GmbH (represented by: A. Herbertz and R. Jung, Rechtsanwälte)

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

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 15 June 2010 in Case T-547/08 X Technology Swiss v OHIM, by which the General Court dismissed the action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 October 2008 dismissing the appeal against the examiner’s decision, which refused registration of the sign consisting of the orange colouring of the toe of a sock as a Community trade mark for goods in Class 25 — Distinctive character of a sign consisting of the partial colouring of a product

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. X Technology Swiss GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 49/14

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 November 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Bari — Italy) — Giovanni Colapietro v Ispettorato Centrale Repressioni Frodi

(Case C-519/10) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 92(1), 103(1) and the second subparagraph of 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Wine sector - Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and Regulation (EC) No 343/94 - Answer to the question admitting of no reasonable doubt - Manifest inadmissibility)

2012/C 49/22

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Bari

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Giovanni Colapietro

Defendant: Ispettorato Centrale Repressioni Frodi

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Bari — Wine sector — Compulsory distillation system — 1993/1994 wine year — Scope of temporal application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organisation of the market in wine (OJ 1987 L 84, p. 1) — Repealing of that regulation by Commission Regulation (EC) No 343/94 of 15 February 1994 opening compulsory distillation as provided for in Article 39 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and derogating for the 1993/94 wine year from certain detailed rules for the application thereof (OJ 1994 L 44, p. 9) — Administrative sanction under national law for infringements of Regulation No 882/87 — Applicability in the case of infringement of Regulation No 343/94 — Proportionality of the administrative sanction imposed

Operative part of the order

Commission Regulation (EC) No 343/94 of 15 February 1994 opening compulsory distillation as provided for in Article 39 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 and derogating for the 1993/94 wine year from certain detailed rules for the application thereof implements Regulation No 822/87 and neither repeals nor replaces it.

(1) OJ C 13, 15.1.2011.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the Sixth Chamber of the Court of 28 September 2011 — European Commission v French Republic

(Case C-179/10) (1)

(2012/C 25/85)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 269/18

Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 June 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank ’s-Gravenhage — Netherlands) — Bibi Mohammad Imran v Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken

(Case C-155/11 PPU) (1)

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

2011/C 269/30

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank ’s-Gravenhage

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bibi Mohammad Imran

Defendant: Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank’s-Gravenhage — Interpretation of Article 7(2) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003 L 251, p. 12) — Conditions governing the exercise of that right — National legislation requiring a member of the family of a third-country national residing lawfully in the Member State concerned to pass a civic integration examination in order to be able to enter that Member State — Member of the family concerned being a mother of eight children, including seven minors, who are lawfully residing in the Member State concerned — Possibility of obtaining tuition in the third country of residence in the language of the Member State — Medical reasons or other grounds preventing the family member concerned from passing the integration examination within a reasonable period of time

Operative part of the order

It is not necessary to give a ruling on the request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Rechtbank’s-Gravenhage (Netherlands), by decision of 31 March 2011.

(1) OJ C 219, 23.7.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 73/25

Order of the President of the Court of 12 January 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado Mercantil de Barcelona — Spain) — Manuel Mesa Bertrán, Cristina Farrán Morenilla v Novacaixagalicia

(Case C-381/11) (1)

2012/C 73/47

Language of the case: Spanish

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

(1) OJ C 290, 1.10.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/3

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 March 2012 — Longevity Health Products Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-81/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Application for Community word mark RESVEROL - Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier international word mark LESTEROL - Assessment of the likelihood of confusion - Rights of the defence)

2012/C 235/03

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Botis, Agent)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 December 2010 in Case T-363/09 Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Gruppo Lepetit, by which that court dismissed an action brought by the applicant for word mark ‘RESVEROL’, for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 35, against decision R 1204/2008-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 9 July 2009, dismissing the appeal lodged against the Opposition Division’s decision which refused in part registration of that mark in the context of the opposition brought by the proprietor of the national word marks ‘LESTEROL’, for goods in Class 5

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Longevity Health Products Inc. shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 7.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/12

Order of the President of the Court of 24 April 2012 — ThyssenKrupp Liften BV v European Commission

(Case C-519/11 P) (1)

2012/C 235/29

Language of the case: Dutch

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

(1) OJ C 355, 3.12.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/12

Order of the President of the Court of 29 March 2012 — European Commission v Kingdom of Denmark

(Case C-323/11) (1)

2012/C 235/26

Language of the case: Danish

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

(1) OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 133/13

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 February 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo No 4 de Valladolid — Espagne) — María Jesús Lorenzo Martínez v Junta de Castilla y León, Dirección General de Recursos Humanos de la Consejería de Educación

(Case C-556/11) (1)

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Social policy - Directive 1999/70/EC - Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Fixed-term employment contracts in the public sector - Non-university teaching - Right to six-yearly continuing professional education increments - Exclusion of teachers employed as temporary officials - Principle of non-discrimination)

2012/C 133/23

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo No 4 de Valladolid

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: María Jesús Lorenzo Martínez

Defendant: Junta de Castilla y León, Dirección General de Recursos Humanos de la Consejería de Educación

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado Contencioso-Administrativo de Valladolid — Interpretation of Clause 4 of the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43) — Principle of non-discrimination — Grant to teaching staff of a six-yearly continuing professional education increment — Increment granted exclusively to established (career) civil servants

Operative part of the order

Clause 4(1) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, concluded on 18 March 1999 and annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which restricts, in the absence of any objective justification, the right to receive a six-yearly continuing professional education increment solely to teachers employed as established (career) civil servants, to the exclusion of those working as temporary officials, where, in respect of the receipt of that increment, those two categories of workers are in comparable situations.

(1) OJ C 25, 28.1.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 366/19

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Brussel — Belgium) — Tate & Lyle Investments Ltd v Belgische Staat

(Case C-384/11) (1)

(The first subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Article 63 TFEU - Tax legislation - Payment of dividends - Withholding tax - Prevention or mitigation of a series of charges to tax - Different treatment of resident recipient companies and non-resident recipient companies)

2012/C 366/32

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Tate & Lyle Investments Ltd

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Intervener: Syral Belgium NV

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Brussel — Interpretation of Article 63 TFEU — Restrictions on the free movement of capital — Tax legislation — Corporation tax — Tax on dividends — National rules providing for a 10 % withholding tax on dividends distributed by resident companies and on assimilated income — Imputation to corporation tax of the amount withheld possible only for resident companies

Operative part of the order

Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which applies withholding tax to dividends distributed by a resident company to resident and non-resident recipient companies which have a holding of less than 10 % in the capital of the distributing company but with a purchase value of at least EUR 1.2 million, while at the same time providing a mechanism for the mitigation of a series of charges to tax only for resident recipient companies. Where a Member State relies on a convention for the avoidance of double taxation concluded with another Member State, it is for the national court to establish whether account should be taken, in the main proceedings, of that convention, and, if so, to determine whether it enables the effects of the restriction on the free movement of capital to be neutralised.

(1) OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.