do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-151/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social Único de Algeciras (Spain) lodged on 28 April 2009 — Federación de Servicios Públicos de la UGT (UGT-FSP) v Ayuntamiento de la Línea de la Concepción, María del Rosario Vecino Uribe and Others, and the Ministerio Fiscal
Date: 2009-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, interpretation of the law, organisation of work, provision of services, public service, staff, wage earner








C_2009167EN.01000302.xml










18.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 167/3





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social Único de Algeciras (Spain) lodged on 28 April 2009 — Federación de Servicios Públicos de la UGT (UGT-FSP) v Ayuntamiento de la Línea de la Concepción, María del Rosario Vecino Uribe and Others, and the Ministerio Fiscal
(Case C-151/09)
2009/C 167/05
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social Único de Algeciras

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Federación de Servicios Públicos de la UGT (UGT-FSP)

Defendants: Ayuntamiento de la Línea de la Concepción, María del Rosario Vecino Uribe and Others,
the Ministerio Fiscal

Question referred

Is the requirement that autonomy be preserved — referred to in Article 6(1) of Directive 2001/23/EC (1) of 12 March 2001 — met in a factual situation (such as that in the main proceedings) in which, following the recovery of various outsourced public services by a municipal authority, the employees who were part of the staff of the actual undertakings which until then had provided the outsourced municipal services are taken on by that municipal administration and integrated into its staff, but it is those same employees (without exception) who continue to hold the same posts and carry out the same duties as before, in the same places of work and under the instruction of the same immediate superiors (hierarchical superiors), without significant changes in the working conditions, the sole difference being that now their overall managers (above the previous superiors) are the relevant publicly elected officials (councillors or mayor)?


(1)  On the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ 2001 L 82, p. 16).
Case T-169/09: Action brought on 28 April 2009 — Vidieffe Srl v OHIM
Date: 2009-04-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), infringement of EU law, leather, leather industry, trade-mark law








C_2009141EN.01005701.xml










20.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 141/57





Action brought on 28 April 2009 — Vidieffe Srl v OHIM
(Case T-169/09)
2009/C 141/115
Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties


Applicant(s): Vidieffe Srl (Bologna, Italy) (represented by: M. Lamandini, avvocato, D. De Pasquale, avvocato, and M. Pappalardo, avvocato)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd

Form of order sought







—


Annul, for breach of 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) (replaced by Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark, OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) and/or misuse of powers, the decision of 12 February 2009 of the first Board of Appeal of OHIM insofar as it upholds the appeal in part and annuls the part of the decision of the Opposition Division of OHIM which rejects the opposition in relation to ‘leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials and not included in other classes; trunks and travelling bags; umbrellas, parasols and walking sticks’ in Class 18 and all goods in Class 25; as a result, uphold in full the decision of the Opposition Division of OHIM (proceedings No B 909 350 of 22 February 2008).










—


Order OHIM to take the necessary measures to comply with the decision of the Court of First Instance.










—


Order OHIM and Perry Ellis to bear all the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Vidieffe Srl

Community trade mark concerned: word mark ‘GOTHA’ (application for registration No 3 665 957), for goods in Classes 18 and 25.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: figurative Community trade mark ‘gotcha’ (No 2 896 199) for goods in Classes 3, 18 and 25.

Decision of the Opposition Division: rejection of the opposition in its entirety.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal partially upheld.

Pleas in law: breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 (replaced by Regulation No 207/2009) and misuse of powers in finding that there is a likelihood of confusing signs which are not likely to be confused.
Case C-518/06: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 28 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Third-party liability motor insurance — Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Directive 92/49/EEC — National legislation imposing an obligation to insure on insurance undertakings — Restriction on the freedom of establishment and on the freedom to provide services — Social protection for victims of road traffic accidents — Proportionality — Insurance undertakings’ freedom to set rates — Principle of supervision by the home Member State)
Date: 2009-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, freedom to provide services, insurance premium, motor car, third-party insurance








C_2009153EN.01000403.xml










4.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 153/4





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 28 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic
(Case C-518/06) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Third-party liability motor insurance - Articles 43 EC and 49 EC - Directive 92/49/EEC - National legislation imposing an obligation to insure on insurance undertakings - Restriction on the freedom of establishment and on the freedom to provide services - Social protection for victims of road traffic accidents - Proportionality - Insurance undertakings’ freedom to set rates - Principle of supervision by the home Member State)
2009/C 153/08
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by I.M. Braguglia, Agent, and by M. Fiorilli, avvocato dello Stato)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Finland (represented by J. Himmanen, Agent)

Re:

Failure to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Infringement of Articles 6, 9, 29 and 39 of Council Directive 92/49/EEC of 18 June 1992 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to direct insurance other than life assurance and amending Directives 73/239/EEC and 88/357/EEC (third non-life insurance Directive) (OJ 1992 L 228, p. 1) — Calculation of insurance premiums — Obligations imposed on insurers whose head office is in another Member State

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Commission of the European Communities, the Italian Republic and the Republic of Finland to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 42, 24.2.2007.