ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/10

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 June 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Austria

(Case C-564/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 49 EC - Freedom to provide services - Patent lawyers - Obligation to take out professional indemnity insurance - Obligation to appoint an approved agent in the Member State in which the services are to be performed)

2009/C 180/16

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: E. Traversa and H. Krämer, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Austria (represented by: E. Riedl and G. Kunnert, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 49 EC — Requirements imposed by national legislation on patent lawyers lawfully established in other Member States in relation to the performance of services, on a temporary basis, in the Member State concerned — Obligation to enrol in the national register, to hold for those purposes professional indemnity insurance, to agree to be bound by all the national disciplinary rules other than those related to professional qualifications and to act in cooperation with a local agent

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by obliging patent lawyers lawfully established in another Member State who wish temporarily to perform services in Austria to appoint an approved agent resident in Austria, the Republic of Austria has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 EC;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 79, 29.03.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 267/9

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 September 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Pequena Instância Criminal do Porto (Portugal)) — Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional (CA/LPFP), Bwin International Ltd, formerly Baw International Ltd v Departamento de Jogos da Santa Casa da Misericórdia de Lisboa

(Case C-42/07) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 49 EC - Restrictions on the freedom to provide services - Offer of games of chance via the internet)

2009/C 267/15

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal de Pequena Instância Criminal do Porto

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional (CA/LPFP), Bwin International Ltd, formerly Baw International Ltd

Defendant: Departamento de Jogos da Santa Casa da Misericórdia de Lisboa

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal de Pequena Instância Criminal do Porto — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC, 49 EC and 56 EC — National legislation granting a specific organisation the exclusive rights to operate games of chance and lotteries, and classing as administrative offences the activities of organising, promoting and collecting bets on sporting events, including over the internet — Prohibition of an undertaking which operates betting and lotteries online, and having its registered office in another Member State, from promoting, organising or operating such betting and lotteries over the internet or from awarding the value of the prizes to the winners

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 EC does not preclude legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which prohibits operators such as Bwin International Ltd, which are established in other Member States, in which they lawfully provide similar services, from offering games of chance via the internet within the territory of that Member State.

(1) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.
2.

Articles 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that passengers whose flights are delayed may be treated, for the purposes of the application of the right to compensation, as passengers whose flights are cancelled and they may thus rely on the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier. Such a delay does not, however, entitle passengers to compensation if the air carrier can prove that the long delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken, namely circumstances beyond the actual control of the air carrier.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/6

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 October 2009 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — Minister voor Wonen, Wijken en Integratie v Woningstichting Sint Servatius

(Case C-567/07) (1)

(Free movement of capital - Article 56 EC - Restrictions - Justification - Housing policy - Services of general economic interest)

2009/C 282/09

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Minister voor Wonen, Wijken en Integratie

Defendant: Woningstichting Sint Servatius

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Raad van State — Interpretation of Articles 56 EC, 58 EC, 86(2) EC, 87 EC and 88 EC — National legislation which, in the absence of prior authorisation by the Minister concerned, prohibits cross-border activities on the part of an undertaking required by statute to operate in furtherance of the housing policy of the Member State in question — Housing policy and public interest

Operative part of the judgment

Article 56 EC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which makes the exercise of cross-frontier activities of institutions approved under Article 70(1) of the Housing Law (Woningwet) in relation to housing matters subject to prior administrative authorisation, in so far as such legislation is not based on objective, non-discriminatory criteria which are known in advance and which are capable of adequately circumscribing the exercise by the national authorities of their discretion, a matter which falls to be determined by the national court.

(1) OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/2

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 September 2010 — Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd, Akcros Chemicals Ltd v European Commission, Council of the Bars and Law Societies of the European Union, Algemene Raad van de Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten, Association européenne des juristes d'entreprise (AEJE), American Corporate Counsel Association (ACCA) — European Chapter, International Bar Association

(Case C-550/07 P P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Measures of inquiry - Commission’s powers of investigation - Legal professional privilege - Employment relationship between a lawyer and an undertaking - Exchanges of e-mails)

2010/C 301/02

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd, Akcros Chemicals Ltd (represented by: M. Mollica, M. van der Woude and C. Swaak, advocaat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and X. Lewis, Agents), Council of the Bars and Law Societies of the European Union (represented by: J. Flynn QC), Algemene Raad van de Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten (represented by: O. Brouwer and C. Schillemans, advocaten), European Company Lawyers Association (AEJE) (represented by: M. Dolmans and K. Nordlander, avocats, J. Temple Lang, solicitor), American Corporate Counsel Association (ACCA) — European Chapter (G. Berrisch, Rechtsanwalt, D. Hull, solicitor), International Bar Association (represented by: J. Buhart and I. Michou, avocats)

Intervener in support of the applicanst: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: V. Jackson and E. Jenkinson, Agents, and M. Hoskins, Barrister), Ireland (represented by: D. O’Hagan, Agent, D. O’Donnell, SC and R. Casey, BL), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels, Y. de Vries and M. de Grave, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber, extended composition) of 17 September 2007 in Case T-253/03 Akzo Nobel Chemicals and Akcros Chemicals v Commission, by which the Court dismissed an action seeking annulment of Decision C(2003) 1533 final of 8 May 2003 rejecting a request for legal professional privilege for certain documents seised in the course of a an investigation ordered in accordance with Article 14(3) of Regulation No 17 (Case COMP/E-1/38.589)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Ireland and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear their own costs;

3. Orders the Conseil des barreaux européens, the Algemene Raad van de Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten, the European Company Lawyers Association, the American Corporate Counsel Association (ACCA) — European Chapter and the International Bar Association to bear their own costs;

4. Orders the remainder of the costs of the proceedings to be born jointly and severally by Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd and Akcros Chemicals Ltd.

(1) OJ C 37, 9.2.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 113/3

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 December 2009 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-424/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Electronic communications - Directive 2002/19/EC - Directive 2002/21/EC - Directive 2002/22/EC - Networks and services - National rules - New markets)

2010/C 113/03

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and A. Nijenhuis, Agents)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma, Agent, C. Koenig, Professor and S. Loetz, Rechtsanwalt)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 8(4) of Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (Access Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 7), Articles 6, 7, 8(1), 15(3) and 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 33), as well as Article 17(2) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51) — Definition, analysis and regulation of new markets — National provisions defining ‘new markets’ in general and laying down restrictive conditions concerning regulation of those markets by the national regulatory authority as well as use of the consultation procedure provided for in Community law in connection with the definition and analysis of those markets

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by adopting Paragraph 9a of the Law on Telecommunications (Telekommunikationsgesetz), of 22 June 2004, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8(4) of Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (Access Directive), Articles 6 to 8(1) and (2), 15(3) and 16 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive), and Article 17(2) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive);

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 327/6

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 November 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-95/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directive 2004/9/EC - Failure to designate the authorities responsible for the inspection of laboratories and for the audit of studies carried out by laboratories to assess compliance with the principles of good laboratory practice)

(2008/C 327/09)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Rozet and P. Oliver, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: C. Schiltz, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2004/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 on the inspection and verification of good laboratory practice (GLP) (OJ 2004 L 50, p. 28) — Failure to designate the authorities responsible for the inspection of laboratories and for the audit of studies carried out by laboratories to assess compliance with the principles of good laboratory practice

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. declares that by not putting in place the authorities able to verify the implementation of the principles of good laboratory practice, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of Directive 2004/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 on the inspection and verification of good laboratory practice (GLP);

2. orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 116 of 9.5.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 113/10

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 March 2009 — Sunplus Technology Co. Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Sun Microsystems Inc.

(Case C-21/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Word and figurative mark ‘SUNPLUS’ - Opposition by the proprietor of the national word marks ‘SUN’ - Refusal of registration)

2009/C 113/18

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Sunplus Technology Co. Ltd (represented by: K. Lochner and H. Gauß, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent), Sun Microsystems Inc. (represented by: M. Graf, Rechtsanwalt)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 15 November 2007 in Case T-38/04 Sunplus Technology Co. Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) in which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action brought, by the applicant for the figurative mark ‘SUNPLUS’ for goods in Class 9, against decision R 642/2000-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 7 October 2003, dismissing the appeal against the decision of the opposition division which refused an application for registration of that mark in opposition proceedings initiated by the holder of the national figurative and word trade marks ‘SUN’ for goods in Class 9 — Similarity between the marks — Article 8(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 judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Sunplus Technology Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 44/22

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 22 December 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland

(Case C-328/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2004/35/EC - Environmental liability - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2009/C 44/37)

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: U. Wölker and I. Koskinen, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Finland (represented by: A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (OJ 2004 L 143, p. 56)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 236, 13.9.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 153/15

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 19 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-313/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2003/58/EC - Company law - Documents and particulars subject to disclosure - Letters and order forms - Penalties - Failure to transpose within the period prescribed)

2009/C 153/29

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: E. Vesco and P. Dejmek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: I. Bruni, Agent, and G. Fiengo, avvocato dello Stato)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the provisions necessary to comply with Article 1(4), (5) and (6) of Directive 2003/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2003 amending Council Directive 68/151/EEC as regards disclosure requirements in respect of certain types of companies (OJ 2003 L 221, p. 13)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 1(4), (5) and (6) of Directive 2003/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2003 amending Council Directive 68/151/EEC, as regards disclosure requirements in respect of certain types of companies, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 141/18

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 23 April 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België (Belgium)) — Draka NK Cables Ltd, AB Sandvik International, VO Sembodja BV, Parc Healthcare International Ltd v Omnipol Ltd

(Case C-167/08) (1)

(Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 43(1) - Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments - Notion of ‘party’))

2009/C 141/30

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Draka NK Cables Ltd, AB Sandvik International, VO Sembodja BV, Parc Healthcare International Ltd

Defendant: Omnipol Ltd

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hof van Cassatie van België — Interpretation of Article 43(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘Brussels I’) (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Notion of ‘party’ — Action brought by a creditor in the name and for the account of his debtor — Decision relating to a request for a declaration of enforceability

Operative part of the judgment

Article 43(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that a creditor of a debtor cannot lodge an appeal against a decision on a request for a declaration of enforceability if he has not formally appeared as a party in the proceedings in which another creditor of that debtor applied for that declaration of enforceability.

(1) OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/24

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 June 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden

(Case C-555/08) (1)

(Failure by a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/56/EC - Cross-border mergers of limited liability companies - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2009/C 180/40

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Dejmek and K. Nyberg, Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk and A. Engman, Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies (OJ 2005 L 310, p. 1) — Financial institutions which require authorisation by a public body, in particular banks and insurance companies

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by not adopting, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies, with regard to financial institutions which require authorisation by a public authority, in particular certain banks and insurance companies, the Kingdom of Sweden has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 153/14

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 May 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-253/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2006/22/EC - Approximation of laws - Social legislation relating to road transport activities - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2009/C 153/26

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Yerrell and M. Teles Romão, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes and F. Fraústo de Azevedo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Directive 2006/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on minimum conditions for the implementation of Council Regulations (EEC) No 3820/85 and (EEC) No 3821/85 concerning social legislation relating to road transport activities and repealing Council Directive 88/599/EEC (OJ 2006 L 102, p. 35)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. declares that by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2006/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on minimum conditions for the implementation of Council Regulations (EEC) No 3820/85 and (EEC) No 3821/85 concerning social legislation relating to road transport activities and repealing Council Directive 88/599/EEC, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2006/22;

2. orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.