do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-423/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, lodged on 29 October 2009 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v X
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: bulb vegetable, dried product, interpretation of the law, refrigerated product, tariff nomenclature








C_2010024EN.01002101.xml










30.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/21





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, lodged on 29 October 2009 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v X
(Case C-423/09)
2010/C 24/36
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Respondent: X

Question referred

What criteria are to be applied in order to determine whether vegetables (garlic bulbs) which have been dried to some degree, but from which not all, or not almost all, of the moisture has been removed, and which are imported in a chilled state, are to be classified under tariff subheading 0703 20 00 of the CN or under tariff subheading 0712 90 90 of the CN?
Case T-352/09 R: Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 29 October 2009 — Novácke chemické závody v Commission (Interim measures — Competition — Commission decision imposing a fine — Bank guarantee — Application for suspension of enforcement of a measure — Lack of urgency)
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, chemical product, competition policy, iron and steel industry, summary procedure








C_2009312EN.01002903.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/29





Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 29 October 2009 — Novácke chemické závody v Commission
(Case T-352/09 R)
(Interim measures - Competition - Commission decision imposing a fine - Bank guarantee - Application for suspension of enforcement of a measure - Lack of urgency)
2009/C 312/49
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Novácke chemické závody, a.s. (Nováky, Slovakia) (represented by: A. Černejová, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and N. von Lingen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for suspension of enforcement of the Commission decision of 22 July 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.396 — Calcium carbide and magnesium-based reagents for the steel and gas industries), in so far as it concerns the applicant

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is rejected.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2009259EN.01000301.xml










29.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 259/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

28 October 2009
2009/C 259/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,4785




JPY


Japanese yen


134,76




DKK


Danish krone


7,4430




GBP


Pound sterling


0,90570




SEK


Swedish krona


10,3912




CHF


Swiss franc


1,5109




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,4000




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,365




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


272,78




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7093




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2523




RON


Romanian leu


4,3004




TRY


Turkish lira


2,2190




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6327




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5855




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


11,4585




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,0125




SGD


Singapore dollar


2,0714




KRW


South Korean won


1 765,82




ZAR


South African rand


11,4789




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


10,0955




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,2250




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 282,26




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0594




PHP


Philippine peso


70,189




RUB


Russian rouble


43,2360




THB


Thai baht


49,463




BRL


Brazilian real


2,5685




MXN


Mexican peso


19,5813




INR


Indian rupee


69,8440






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-85/09 P: Order of the Court of 29 October 2009 — Portela — Comércio de artigos ortopédicos e hospitalares, Lda v European Commission (Appeal — Non-contractual liability — Claim for compensation for damage sustained on account of the various omissions by the Commission in the application of Directive 93/42/EEC — No causal connection between the omission alleged and the damage suffered by the applicant in the marketing of defective digital thermometers — Appeal manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, appeal, indemnification, medical device, product quality, third-party insurance, withdrawal from the market








C_2010051EN.01001502.xml










27.2.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 51/15





Order of the Court of 29 October 2009 — Portela — Comércio de artigos ortopédicos e hospitalares, Lda v European Commission
(Case C-85/09 P) (1)

(Appeal - Non-contractual liability - Claim for compensation for damage sustained on account of the various omissions by the Commission in the application of Directive 93/42/EEC - No causal connection between the omission alleged and the damage suffered by the applicant in the marketing of defective digital thermometers - Appeal manifestly unfounded)
2010/C 51/24
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Appellant: Portela — Comércio de artigos ortopédicos e hospitalares, Lda (represented by: C. Mourato, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Schima and P. Guerra e Andrade, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) of 17 December 2008 in Case T-137/07 Portela v Commission, in which the Court rejected as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, for the remainder, manifestly unfounded an application claiming, primarily, that the Court of First Instance should impose on the Commission the obligation to act in accordance with Article 14b of Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices (OJ 1993 L 169, p. 1), as amended by Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (OJ 1998 L 331, p. 1), by ordering the certification company TÜV Rheinland Product Safety GmbH, through the Federal Republic of Germany, to activate, in favour of the appellant, the mandatory civil liability insurance provided for in point 6 of Annex XI to Directive 93/42, concluded by that company or, if the alleged damage could not be remedied by the main claim, a claim for compensation for the damage sustained by the applicant on account of the various omissions on the part of the Commission.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Portela — Comércio de artigos ortopédicos e hospitalares, Lda is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
Case T-386/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 October 2009 — Peek & Cloppenburg v OHIM — Redfil (Agile) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark Agile — Earlier Community and national word marks Aygill’s — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2009312EN.01002702.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/27





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 October 2009 — Peek & Cloppenburg v OHIM — Redfil (Agile)
(Case T-386/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Agile - Earlier Community and national word marks Aygill’s - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2009/C 312/44
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: T. Dolde, A. Renck and V. von Bomhard, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by S. Laitinen, and subsequently by R. Pethke, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Redfil, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: C. Hernández Hernández, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 July 2007 (Case R 1324/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg and Redfil, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 26 July 2007 (Case R 1324/2006 2).










2.


Orders OHIM to pay the costs incurred by Peek & Cloppenburg.










3.


Orders Redfil, SL to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 297, 8.12.2007.
Case C-536/07: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Public works contracts — Directive 93/37/EEC — Contract between a public body and a private undertaking for the lease to the former of exhibition halls to be built by the latter — Private undertaking to be paid by means of a monthly rent for a period of 30 years)
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Germany, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, award of contract, building industry, public contract, works contract








C_2009312EN.01000202.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/2





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany
(Case C-536/07) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Public works contracts - Directive 93/37/EEC - Contract between a public body and a private undertaking for the lease to the former of exhibition halls to be built by the latter - Private undertaking to be paid by means of a monthly rent for a period of 30 years)
2009/C 312/03
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Kukovec and R. Sauer, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and J. Möller, acting as Agents, and by H.-J. Prieß, Rechtsanwalt)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 7 in conjunction with Article 11 of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54) — Failure to organise an open procedure for award of a contract before the conclusion of a contract between the City of Cologne and a private investment firm concerning the rent by the city, for a fixed period of 30 years in consideration for a total rent of more than EUR 600 million, of four exhibition halls to be constructed by that private firm in accordance with detailed contract documents

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 7(4) and 11 of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts by reason of the fact that the City of Cologne concluded the contract of 6 August 2004 with Grundstücksgesellschaft Köln Messe 15 bis 18 GbR, now Grundstücksgesellschaft Köln Messe 8-11 GbR, without applying the procedure for the award of public contracts laid down by those provisions;










2.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 51, 23.2.2008.
Case C-246/08: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Sixth VAT Directive — Article 2(1) and Article 4(1) and (2) — Meaning of economic activities — Public legal aid offices — Legal aid services provided in legal proceedings in return for a part contribution paid by the recipient — Meaning of direct link between the service rendered and the consideration received)
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, VAT, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, legal adviser, legal aid, public institution, tax exemption








C_2009312EN.01000702.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/7





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland
(Case C-246/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Sixth VAT Directive - Article 2(1) and Article 4(1) and (2) - Meaning of ‘economic activities’ - Public legal aid offices - Legal aid services provided in legal proceedings in return for a part contribution paid by the recipient - Meaning of ‘direct link’ between the service rendered and the consideration received)
2009/C 312/10
Language of the case: Finnish

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Aalto and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

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

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 2(1) and 4(1), (2) and (5) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — National legislation providing for different treatment for VAT purposes of legal advice services depending on whether they are provided by private legal advisers or by advisers working in public legal aid offices — Distortions of competition

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 209, 15.08.2008.
Case T-443/09: Action brought on 29 October 2009 — TTNB v OHIM — March (Tila March)
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), brand name, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2009312EN.01004001.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/40





Action brought on 29 October 2009 — TTNB v OHIM — March (Tila March)
(Case T-443/09)
2009/C 312/66
Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties


Applicant: TTNB SARL (represented by: J.-M.Moiroux, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Juan Carmen March (Madrid, Spain)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 August 2009 in Case R 1538/2008-2 and authorise the registration of the mark applied for;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Tamara Taichman, the applicant’s predecessor

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘Tila March’ for goods in Classes 3, 18 and 25 — application No 5 402 722

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Carmen March Juan

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the Spanish word mark ‘CARMEN MARCH’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 18, 24, 25, 35 and 38. The opposition was brought against registration of the goods in Classes 3, 18 and 25

Decision of the Opposition Division: rejection of the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: annulment of the decision of the opposition division

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) since there is no likelihood of confusion between the conflicting marks.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5580 — Blackrock/Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, architectural heritage, cultural heritage, disclosure of information, economic concentration, environmental risk prevention, heritage protection, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation








C_2009259EN.01000201.xml










29.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 259/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5580 — Blackrock/Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 259/03
On 22 September 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5580. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1029/2009 of 29 October 2009 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Grelos de Galicia (PGI))
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Spain, designation of origin, location of production, product designation, vegetable








L_2009283EN.01004101.xml










30.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 283/41








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1029/2009
of 29 October 2009
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Grelos de Galicia (PGI))


THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) and in accordance with Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Grelos de Galicia’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 29 October 2009.


For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 72, 26.3.2009, p. 58.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

SPAIN
Grelos de Galicia (PGI)
Case C-474/08: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt all the provisions necessary to comply with Article 23(2) and (5) of Directive 2003/54/EC concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity — Powers of the regulatory authority in the electricity sector)
Date: 2009-10-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, domestic market, electrical energy, energy distribution, energy grid, energy transport








C_2009312EN.01000901.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/9





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-474/08) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Failure to adopt all the provisions necessary to comply with Article 23(2) and (5) of Directive 2003/54/EC concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity - Powers of the regulatory authority in the electricity sector)
2009/C 312/13
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Patakia and B. Schima, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: C. Pochet, acting as Agent, and J. Scalais and O. Vanhulst, avocats)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt all the provisions necessary to comply with Article 23(2) and (5) of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC (OJ 2003 L 176, p. 37) — Powers of the regulatory authority in the electricity sector

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that






—


by failing to provide that cases of refusal of access to the electricity distribution or transmission systems may be submitted to the regulatory authority which must then issue a binding decision within a period of two months, in accordance with the provisions of Article 23(5) of Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC, and










—


by attributing to an authority other than the regulatory authority the power to define criteria which are decisive for the calculation of tariffs as regards certain electricity transmission installations, contrary to the provisions of Article 23(2)(a) of Directive 2003/54,
the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;














2.


Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 07.02.2009.