do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-557/10: Action brought on 29 November 2010 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Portugal, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, rail transport, transport infrastructure, transport policy, transport safety








C_2011038EN.01000701.xml










5.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/7





Action brought on 29 November 2010 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-557/10)
2011/C 38/08
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: H. Støvlbæk and M. França, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Form of order sought







—


Declare that, with regard to transposition of the first railway package, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(3) of Council Directive 91/440/EEC (1) of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community's railways (as amended by Directive 2001/12/EC) (2), Article 7(3) of Directive 91/440/EEC and Article 6(1) of Directive 2001/14/EC (3) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification,










—


order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments



Management independence


Article 5(3) of Directive 91/440 contains a list of decisions that railway undertakings must be able to take without State interference. These include decisions relating to staff, assets and own procurement. These decisions must be taken in the context of the general policy guidelines determined by the State. However, in Portugal, with regard to the public undertaking CP, the State not only lays down general strategic guidelines for the acquisition and disposal of holdings in other companies, but also requires individual decisions to acquire or dispose of holdings in the capital of companies to be subject to the approval of the government. For these reasons, the Commission considers that Portugal has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(3) of Directive 91/440 (as amended).


Tariffs for access to railway infrastructure


Under Articles 7(3) of Directive 91/440 (as amended) and 6(1) of Directive 2001/14, Member States are to lay down conditions to ensure that the accounts of the railway infrastructure manager are balanced. In Portugal, however, income from infrastructure charges, State funding and other income from commercial activities is insufficient to balance the accounts of the infrastructure manager, the public undertaking REFER E.P. For these reasons, the Commission considers that Portugal has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(3) of Directive 91/440 (as amended) and 6(1) of Directive 2001/14.


(1)  OJ L 1991 237, p. 25


(2)  OJ L 2001 75, p. 1


(3)  OJ 2001 L 75, p. 29
Case C-558/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Chartres (France) lodged on 29 November 2010 — Michel Bourges-Maunoury, Marie-Louise Bourges-Maunoury (née Heintz) v Direction des Services Fiscaux d’Eure et Loir
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, piece work pay, taxpayer, wealth tax








C_2011046EN.01000601.xml










12.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/6





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Chartres (France) lodged on 29 November 2010 — Michel Bourges-Maunoury, Marie-Louise Bourges-Maunoury (née Heintz) v Direction des Services Fiscaux d’Eure et Loir
(Case C-558/10)
2011/C 46/09
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de Grande Instance de Chartres

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Michel Bourges-Maunoury, Marie-Louise Bourges-Maunoury (née Heintz)

Defendant: Direction des Services Fiscaux d’Eure et Loir

Question referred

Is it contrary to the second paragraph of Article 13 of Chapter V of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, (1) annexed to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities, for the entirety of a taxpayer’s income, including Community income, to be taken into account in calculating the cap on wealth tax (‘impôt de solidarité sur la fortune’)?


(1)  OJ 1967 L 152, p. 13, now Article 12 of Chapter V of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union (OJ 2010 C 83, p. 266).
2010/751/EU: Decision of the European Central Bank of 29 November 2010 on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2011 (ECB/2010/25)
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, issuing of currency, participating country (euro area)








L_2010318EN.01005201.xml










4.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 318/52








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
         
of 29 November 2010
         
on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2011
(ECB/2010/25)
(2010/751/EU)


THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 128(2) thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2010/416/EU of 13 July 2010 in accordance with Article 140(2) of the Treaty on the adoption by Estonia of the euro on 1 January 2011 (1), and in particular Article 1 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The European Central Bank (ECB) has the exclusive right from 1 January 1999 to approve the volume of coins issued by the Member States whose currency is the euro.












(2)


The derogation in favour of Estonia referred to in Article 4 of the 2003 Act of Accession has been abrogated with effect from 1 January 2011.












(3)


The 16 Member States whose currency is the euro and Estonia have submitted to the ECB for approval their estimates of the volume of euro coins to be issued in 2011, supplemented by explanatory notes on the forecasting methodology,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1

Approval of the volume of euro coins to be issued in 2011

The ECB hereby approves the volume of euro coins to be issued by the Member States whose currency is the euro in 2011 as described in the following table:






(EUR million)




 


Issuance of coins intended for circulation and issuance of collector coins (not intended for circulation) in 2011




Belgium


178,3 




Germany


629 




Estonia


48,4 




Ireland


44,4 




Greece


54,5 




Spain


180 




France


300 




Italy


262,4 




Cyprus


15,6 




Luxembourg


30 




Malta


6,8 




Netherlands


64 




Austria


277 




Portugal


30 




Slovenia


36 




Slovakia


42,2 




Finland


60 






Article 2

Final provision

This Decision is addressed to the Member States whose currency is the euro and Estonia.




Done at Frankfurt am Main, 29 November 2010.


The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude TRICHET
            





(1)  
            OJ L 196, 28.7.2010, p. 24.
Case T-553/10: Action brought on 29 November 2010 — Biodes v OHIM — Manasul Internacional (FARMASUL)
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01005301.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/53





Action brought on 29 November 2010 — Biodes v OHIM — Manasul Internacional (FARMASUL)
(Case T-553/10)
()
2011/C 30/94
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Biodes S.L. (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Manasul Internacional S.L. (Ponferrada, Spain)

Form of order sought







—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 September 2010 in Case R 1034/2009-1, and










—


order the defendant and any interveners to pay all the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘FARMASUL’ for goods in Classes 5, 30 and 31.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Manasul Internacional S.L.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative marks ‘MANASUL’ and ‘MANASUL ORO’ for goods in Classes 5, 30 and 31.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected and mark applied for granted.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal upheld and mark applied for refused.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) since there is no similarity between the marks at issue, that the opponent has forgotten to examine the second licence agreement which amended the first licence agreement, and that the opposing mark’s alleged reputation is nonexistent.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-105/10: Order of the General Court of 29 November 2010 — BASF v Commission
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: action for annulment (EU), agricultural product, chemical product, economic concentration, plastics








C_2011030EN.01005704.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/57





Order of the General Court of 29 November 2010 — BASF v Commission
(Case T-105/10) (1)

()
2011/C 30/104
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 113, 1.5.2010.
2010/733/EU: Council Decision of 29 November 2010 appointing a Finnish alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, Finland, appointment of staff








L_2010316EN.01000901.xml










2.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 316/9








            COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 29 November 2010
         
appointing a Finnish alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
(2010/733/EU)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Finnish Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).












(2)


An alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate of Mr Miikka SEPPÄLÄ,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions as alternate member for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:
Mr Antero SAKSALA

Pirkkalan kunnanvaltuuston jäsen



Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 29 November 2010.


For the Council


The President

K. PEETERS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22, and OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.
Case T-547/10: Action brought on 29 November 2010 — Omya v OHIM — Alpha Calcit (CALCIMATT)
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01005101.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/51





Action brought on 29 November 2010 — Omya v OHIM — Alpha Calcit (CALCIMATT)
(Case T-547/10)
()
2011/C 30/91
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Omya AG (Oftringen, Switzerland) (represented by: F. Kuschmirek, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Alpha Calcit Füllstoffgesellschaft mbH (Cologne, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 16 September 2010 in Case R 1370/2009-1, and order the defendant to register Community trade mark application No 5 200 654‘CALCIMATT’ for all the goods in respect of which application was sought;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs;










—


in the alternative, stay the proceedings until a final decision has been taken on whether OHIM is to remove the opposing mark EU 003513488 ‘CALCILAN’ from the register.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Omya AG.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘CALCIMATT’ for goods in Classes 1 and 2.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Alpha Calcit Füllstoffgesellschaft mbH.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Internationally registered word marks ‘CALCIPLAST’, ‘CALCILIT’ and ‘CALCICELL’ for goods in Classes 1 and 19, Community word marks ‘Calcilit’ and ‘CALCILAN’ for goods in Classes 1 and 19, and national word works ‘CALCICELL’ and ‘CALCIPLAST’ for goods in Class 1.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the decision of the Opposition Division and refusal to register.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) since there is no likelihood of confusion between opposing marks as regards the goods in respect of which application was sought.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-21/09: Order of the General Court of 29 November 2010 — Eurotel v OHIM — DVB Project (DVB)
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, Italy, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01005701.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/57





Order of the General Court of 29 November 2010 — Eurotel v OHIM — DVB Project (DVB)
(Case T-21/09) (1)

()
2011/C 30/101
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 69, 21.3.2009.
Case C-559/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 29 November 2010 — Deli Ostrich NV v Belgische Staat
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: customs regulations, import, interpretation of the law








C_2011055EN.01001802.xml










19.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 55/18





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 29 November 2010 — Deli Ostrich NV v Belgische Staat
(Case C-559/10)
2011/C 55/32
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Deli Ostrich NV

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Question referred

The Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Antwerpen asks the Court of Justice to give a ruling on which tariff subheading should be applied, as at the date of the declaration of 22 October 2007, in respect of import duties on meat from camels which, indisputably, are not kept in captivity.
Case T-546/10: Action brought on 29 November 2010 — Nordmilch v OHIM — Lactimilk (MILRAM)
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01005002.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/50





Action brought on 29 November 2010 — Nordmilch v OHIM — Lactimilk (MILRAM)
(Case T-546/10)
()
2011/C 30/90
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Nordmilch AG (Bremen, Germany) (represented by: R. Schneider, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Lactimilk, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 September 2010 in Joined Cases R 1041/2009-4 and R 1053/2009-4, in so far as it refuses Community trade mark application 002 851 384 for certain goods in Classes 5 and 29;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘MILRAM’ for goods in Classes 5, 29, 30, 33, 33 and 43.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Lactimilk, SA.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark containing the word element ‘RAM’ for goods in Classes 29, and various national word marks ‘RAM’ for goods in Classes 5, 29, 30 and 32.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection in part of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the decision of the Opposition Division, in so far as the opposition in respect of certain goods was rejected and refusal of registration for the goods in question.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) since there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue. The applicant also claims that the Board of Appeal did not take account, in respect of an opposing mark, that its protection had expired at the time of the decision of 15 September 2010.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-578/08: Order of the General Court of 29 November 2010 — DVB Project v OHIM — Eurotel (DVB)
Date: 2010-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), exchange of information, provision of services, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01005603.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/56





Order of the General Court of 29 November 2010 — DVB Project v OHIM — Eurotel (DVB)
(Case T-578/08) (1)

()
2011/C 30/100
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.