do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5818 — Ericsson/LG Electronics/JV)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, mobile phone, radio telecommunications, telecommunications industry








C_2010185EN.01000502.xml










9.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 185/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5818 — Ericsson/LG Electronics/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 185/03
On 23 June 2010, 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 32010M5818. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-349/10 P: Appeal brought on 9 July 2010 by Claro, S.A. against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Fifth Chamber) on 28 April 2010 in Case T-225/09 Claro, S.A. v OHIM and Telefónica, S.A.
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, mobile phone, telecommunications industry, telephone, trade-mark law








C_2010234EN.01002902.xml










28.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 234/29





Appeal brought on 9 July 2010 by Claro, S.A. against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Fifth Chamber) on 28 April 2010 in Case T-225/09 Claro, S.A. v OHIM and Telefónica, S.A.
(Case C-349/10 P)
()
2010/C 234/48
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Claro, S.A. (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and Castán Pérez-Gómez, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and Telefónica, S.A.

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should take cognisance of the appeal lodged and the supporting documents, declare the appeal against the judgment of the Fifth Chamber of the General Court of 28 April 2010 in Case T-225/09 lodged in time and in the required form and, via the appropriate procedure, and set aside the judgment under appeal and grant the form of order sought by Claro, S.A.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Erroneous interpretation made by the General Court of Article 59 of the Community trade mark regulation. The appeal is based on the premise that, contrary to the arguments of the General Court (and of the Board of Appeal earlier in the proceedings), the submission of the statement of the grounds for the appeal does not constitute a requirement for the admissibility of the appeal, but constitutes a mere procedural requirement. By its ground of appeal the appellant also claims that that misinterpretation on the part of the General Court (and the Board of Appeal earlier in the proceedings) entailed an infringement of the principle of continuity in terms of their functions between the various departments of OHIM, set out in Article 62(1) of Regulation No 40/94. (1)



(1)  Council Regulation of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
Case T-300/10: Action brought on 9 July 2010 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Parliament, access to information, action for annulment, provision of documents








C_2010246EN.01003702.xml










11.9.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/37





Action brought on 9 July 2010 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission
(Case T-300/10)
()
2010/C 246/64
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV (Rosbach, Germany) (represented by: H. Kaltenecker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


annul the Commission’s decision of 29 April 2010 in so far as the applicant is thereby refused access to documents which have not been released or which have been the subject of only partial release;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings and the costs incurred by the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant challenges the Commission’s decision of 29 April 2010, by which its second application for access to undisclosed documents relating to the LIEN 97-2011 contract was refused in part.
In support of its action the applicant submits, in essence, that the Commission was not entitled to deny the applicant access to the documents applied for on the basis of the exceptions laid down in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1) concerning protection of the decision-making process and protection of the privacy and integrity of the individual. The applicant further submits in this connection that there is an overriding public interest in release of the documents which have not yet been made available.


(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5905 — Sacyr/Eiser/Aunor/Turia/Itemosa/Itepesa)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, investment, maintenance, management, merger control, service concession, transport infrastructure








C_2010185EN.01000501.xml










9.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 185/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5905 — Sacyr/Eiser/Aunor/Turia/Itemosa/Itepesa)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 185/02
On 1 July 2010, 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 32010M5905. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case F-26/07: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 9 July 2010 — Potoms and Scillia v Parliament
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Parliament, European official, action by staff, appointment of staff, personnel administration, professional career, regulations for civil servants, wage determination








C_2010288EN.01007603.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/76






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 9 July 2010 — Potoms and Scillia v Parliament
(Case F-26/07) (1)

()
(2010/C 288/146)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 117, 26.5.2007, p. 37.
Case F-55/10: Action brought on 9 July 2010 — Moschonaki v Commission
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, European official, action for annulment, damages, indemnification, library, regulations for civil servants, servant (EU)








C_2010246EN.01004302.xml










11.9.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/43





Action brought on 9 July 2010 — Moschonaki v Commission
(Case F-55/10)
()
2010/C 246/76
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Chrysanthe Moschonaki (Brusssels, Belgium) (represented by: N. Lhoëst)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision refusing to take into consideration the applicant’s application for a post as a library assistant and an order that the Commission pay her a sum by way of compensation for the material and non-material harm suffered.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:






—


annul the appointing authority’s decision of 30 September 2009, by which it refused to take into consideration the applicant’s application in consequence of the publication of the vacancy notice COM/2009/1379 for the post of library assistant within DGT.D.3;










—


so far as necessary, annul the appointing authority’s decision of 31 March 2010, rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant on 28 December 2009 under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations;










—


grant the applicant damages of EUR 30 000 in respect of the material and non-material harm she suffered;










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.
Case T-510/08: Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2010 — Toqueville v OHIM — Schiesaro (TOCQUEVILLE 13) (Community trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Community word mark TOCQUEVILLE 13 — Failure to comply with the time-limit for appealing against a revocation decision — Application for restitutio in integrum — Article 78 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 81 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), quality label








C_2010234EN.01003402.xml










28.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 234/34





Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2010 — Toqueville v OHIM — Schiesaro (TOCQUEVILLE 13)
(Case T-510/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community word mark TOCQUEVILLE 13 - Failure to comply with the time-limit for appealing against a revocation decision - Application for restitutio in integrum - Article 78 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 81 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 234/60
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Toqueville Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: S. Bariatti, I Palombella and E. Cucchiara, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Sempio, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Marco Schiesaro (Limbiate, Italy) (represented by: A. Canella and D. Camaiora, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of 26 August 2008 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM (Case R 829/2008-2) concerning the applicant’s application for restitutio in integrum

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Toqueville Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 19, 24.1.2009.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010185EN.01000601.xml










9.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 185/6





Euro exchange rates (1)

8 July 2010
2010/C 185/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2660




JPY


Japanese yen


111,49




DKK


Danish krone


7,4543




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83560




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5474




CHF


Swiss franc


1,3321




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,0660




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,448




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


281,27




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7092




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0790




RON


Romanian leu


4,2273




TRY


Turkish lira


1,9630




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4471




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3213




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,8599




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7893




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7491




KRW


South Korean won


1 530,78




ZAR


South African rand


9,5877




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,5785




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,1890




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 474,25




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,0544




PHP


Philippine peso


58,775




RUB


Russian rouble


39,1400




THB


Thai baht


41,056




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2297




MXN


Mexican peso


16,2652




INR


Indian rupee


59,3280






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case F-91/09: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 9 July 2010 — Marcuccio v Commission (Public service — Officials — Reasonable time-limits for bringing a claim for damages — Out of time)
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment, damage, indemnification, medical report, medicine








C_2010288EN.01007202.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/72






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 9 July 2010 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case F-91/09) (1)

(Public service - Officials - Reasonable time-limits for bringing a claim for damages - Out of time)
(2010/C 288/135)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

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

Re:

Rejection by the Commission of the applicant’s request for compensation for damage purportedly suffered as a result of a letter by which the Commission asked a doctor to carry out a medical examination in order to determine whether the applicant was genuinely unfit for work.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded.










2.


Mr Marcuccio is to pay the costs in their entirety.






(1)  OJ C 11 of 16.1.2010, p. 41.
Action brought on 9 July 2010 by Swisscom RE Aktiengesellschaft against the EFTA Surveillance Authority (Case E-7/10)
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA Court, European standard, Liechtenstein, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, freedom to provide services, insurance company, reinsurance, right of establishment








C_2010256EN.01000901.xml










23.9.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 256/9





Action brought on 9 July 2010 by Swisscom RE Aktiengesellschaft against the EFTA Surveillance Authority
(Case E-7/10)
2010/C 256/09
An action against the EFTA Surveillance Authority was brought before the EFTA Court on 9 July 2010 by Swisscom RE Aktiengesellschaft, represented by Dr. Michael Sánchez Rydelski, Rechtsanwalt for Swisscom RE Aktiengesellschaft, Kirchstrasse 12, 9490 Vaduz, LIECHTENSTEIN.
Swisscom RE Aktiengesellschaft requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


annul EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 97/10/COL of 24 March 2010 regarding the taxation of captive insurance companies under the Liechtenstein Tax Act;










2.


in the alternative, declare void Articles 3 and 4 of EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 97/10/COL of 24 March 2010 to the extent that they order the recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1 of that Decision;
and










3.


order the EFTA Surveillance Authority to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


The Applicant, Swisscom RE Aktiengesellschaft, a wholly owned subsidiary of Swisscom AG, has carried out captive reinsurance operations in Liechtenstein for the Swisscom Group since its establishment in 1997.










—


The Applicant submits that the EFTA Surveillance Authority incorrectly applied Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. The Liechtenstein tax measures do not constitute State aid because captives do not qualify as undertakings within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. Furthermore, the Liechtenstein tax measure cannot be regarded as selective measures under Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.










—


Moreover, the Applicant claims:






—


that, should the Court conclude that the Liechtenstein tax measures were to involve State aid, the EFTA Surveillance Authority erred in ordering the recovery of the alleged aid as from 6 November 2001; and










—


that the EFTA Surveillance Authority did not provide adequate reasoning on essential points in its assessment, as required by Article 16 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Case C-461/09 P: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 July 2010 — The Wellcome Foundation Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Serono Genetics Institute SA (Appeals — Community trade mark — Word mark FAMOXIN — Application for a declaration of invalidity made by the proprietor of the national word mark LAMOXIN — Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity)
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, pharmaceutical product, trade-mark law








C_2010288EN.01002602.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/26






Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 July 2010 — The Wellcome Foundation Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Serono Genetics Institute SA
(Case C-461/09 P) (1)

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Word mark FAMOXIN - Application for a declaration of invalidity made by the proprietor of the national word mark LAMOXIN - Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity)
(2010/C 288/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: The Wellcome Foundation Ltd (represented by: R. Gilbey, avocat)

Other parties to the main proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent), Serono Genetics Institute SA

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 23 September 2009 in Joined Cases T-493/07, T-26/08 and T-27/08 GlaxoSmithkline — Laboratórios Wellcome de Portugal — The Wellcome Foundation v OHIM, in which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action for annulment brought by the proprietor of the national word mark ‘LANOXIN’ for goods in Class 5 against Decision R 8/2007-1 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 14 September 2007 dismissing the appeal brought against the decision of the Cancellation Division rejecting the application for a declaration of invalidity submitted by the applicant concerning the Community word mark ‘FAMOXIN’ for goods and services in Class 5

Operative part of the order

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders The Wellcome Foundation Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 37, 13.02.2010.
Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations  (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, air transport, airline, disclosure of information, inland transport, public service, transport regulations








C_2010185EN.01001601.xml










9.7.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 185/16





Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 185/09






Member State


United Kingdom




Concerned route


Cardiff–RAF Valley, Anglesey




Period of validity of the contract


4th January 2011 to 19th December 2014




Deadline for submission of tenders


20th September 2010




Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the pubic tender and the public service obligation can be obtained


Corporate Procurement Unit





Welsh Assembly Government




Cathays Park




Cardiff




CF10 3NQ




UNITED KINGDOM




or
Deborah Paramore
Transport Policy Division
E-mail: deborah.paramore@wales.gsi.gov.uk
Contract Reference: C-33/2010/11
Case T-85/08: Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2010 — Exalation v OHIM (Vektor-Lycopin) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark Vektor-Lycopin — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2010-07-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, credit institution, trade-mark law








C_2010234EN.01003201.xml










28.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 234/32





Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2010 — Exalation v OHIM (Vektor-Lycopin)
(Case T-85/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Vektor-Lycopin - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 234/54
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Exalation Ltd (Ilford, Essex, United Kingdom) (represented by: K. Zingsheim, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: S. Schäffner, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 December 2007 (Case R 1037/2007-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Vektor-Lycopin as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Exalation Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.