do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-362/09 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 December 2010 — Athinaïki Techniki AE v European Commission, Athens Resort Casino AE Symmetochon (Appeal — State aid — Complaint — Decision to take no further action on the complaint — Withdrawal of the decision to take no further action — Conditions governing the lawfulness of withdrawal — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Greece, State aid, action for annulment (EU), competition law, control of State aid








C_2011055EN.01001203.xml










19.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 55/12





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 December 2010 — Athinaïki Techniki AE v European Commission, Athens Resort Casino AE Symmetochon
(Case C-362/09 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Complaint - Decision to take no further action on the complaint - Withdrawal of the decision to take no further action - Conditions governing the lawfulness of withdrawal - Regulation (EC) No 659/1999)
2011/C 55/21
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Athinaïki Techniki AE (represented by: S. Pappas, dikigoros)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, Agent), Athens Resort Casino AE Symmetochon (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, dikigoros)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 29 June 2009 in Case T-94/05 Athinaïki Techniki AE v Commission by which the Court held that there was no longer any need to adjudicate on the action brought by the applicant following the Commission’s withdrawal of the contested decision to take no further action on the applicant’s complaint relating to State aid allegedly granted by the Hellenic Republic — Misinterpretation of the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-521/06 P Athinaïki Techniki — Conditions governing the lawfulness of the withdrawal of a Community administrative act — Failure to take administrative action in the context of the State aid investigation procedure not permissible — Principle of proportionality

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the order of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 29 June 2009 in Case T-94/05 Athinaïki Techniki v Commission;










2.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










3.


Orders that the costs be reserved.






(1)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2009.
Case T-19/07: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Systran and Systran Luxembourg v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Call for tenders to carry out a project relating to the maintenance and linguistic enhancement of the Commission's machine translation system — Source codes for a computer program being marketed — Infringement of copyright — Unauthorised disclosure of know-how — Action for compensation — Non-contractual dispute — Admissibility — Actual and certain damage — Causal link — Flat-rate assessment of the amount of the damage)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: appeal to the Court (EU), industrial counterfeiting, intellectual property, invitation to tender, machine translation, provision of services, software








C_2011038EN.01000902.xml










5.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/9





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Systran and Systran Luxembourg v Commission
(Case T-19/07) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Call for tenders to carry out a project relating to the maintenance and linguistic enhancement of the Commission's machine translation system - Source codes for a computer program being marketed - Infringement of copyright - Unauthorised disclosure of know-how - Action for compensation - Non-contractual dispute - Admissibility - Actual and certain damage - Causal link - Flat-rate assessment of the amount of the damage)
2011/C 38/12
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Systran SA (Paris, France); and Systran Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: J.-P. Spitzer and E. De Boissieu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by E. Montaguti and M.F. Benyon, and subsequently by E. Traversa and E. Montaguti, Agents, and A. Berenboom and M. Isgour, lawyers)

Re:

Action for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of infringements committed following a call for tenders by the Commission relating to the maintenance and linguistic enhancement of its machine translation system.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders the European Commission to pay Systran SA flat-rate compensation of EUR 12 001 000;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders the Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.
Case T-52/10 P: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Lebedef v Commission (Appeal — Staff case — Officials — Annual leave — Half-time secondment for union representation — Unauthorised absence — Deduction of days from annual leave entitlement — Article 60 of the Staff Regulations)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), paid leave








C_2011038EN.01001503.xml










5.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/15





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Lebedef v Commission
(Case T-52/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Staff case - Officials - Annual leave - Half-time secondment for union representation - Unauthorised absence - Deduction of days from annual leave entitlement - Article 60 of the Staff Regulations)
2011/C 38/28
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Giorgio Lebedef (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and G. Berscheid, agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 30 November 2009 in Case F-54/09 Lebedef v Commission ECR-SC I-A-1-0000 and II-A-1-0000, with the request that the order be set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the appeal;










2.


orders Mr Giorgio Lebedef to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission in these proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 113 of 1.5.2010.
Case C-339/09: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Skoma-Lux sro v Celní ředitelství Olomouc (Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Headings 2204 and 2206 — Beverage fermented on the basis of fresh grapes — Alcohol content of 15,8 % to 16,1 % by volume — Addition of corn alcohol and beet sugar during the course of production)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, beet sugar, common customs tariff, interpretation of the law, marketing, processed food product, wine








C_2011055EN.01001201.xml










19.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 55/12





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Skoma-Lux sro v Celní ředitelství Olomouc
(Case C-339/09) (1)

(Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Headings 2204 and 2206 - Beverage fermented on the basis of fresh grapes - Alcohol content of 15,8 % to 16,1 % by volume - Addition of corn alcohol and beet sugar during the course of production)
2011/C 55/19
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Skoma-Lux sro

Defendant: Celní ředitelství Olomouc

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Nejvyšší správní soud — Interpretation of Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003 (OJ 2003 L 281, p. 1) — Red dessert wine Kagor — Classification under heading 2204 or heading 2206 of the combined nomenclature

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1719/2005 of 27 October 2005, must be interpreted as meaning that a beverage fermented on the basis of fresh grapes, sold in 0.75 litre bottles, with an alcohol content of 15,8 % to 16,1 % by volume, to which beet sugar and corn alcohol have been added during the course of its production, must be classified under heading 2206 of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to that regulation.


(1)  OJ C 282, 21.11.2009.
Joined Cases T-231/06 and T-237/06: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Netherlands v Commission (State aid — Public service broadcasting — Measures taken by the Netherlands authorities — Decision declaring State aid compatible in part and incompatible in part with the common market — New aid or existing aid — Concept of State aid — Concept of undertaking — Overcompensation for the costs of the public service mission — Proportionality — Duty to give reasons — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Netherlands, State aid, action for annulment (EU), broadcasting, public sector








C_2011038EN.01000901.xml










5.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/9





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Netherlands v Commission
(Joined Cases T-231/06 and T-237/06) (1)

(State aid - Public service broadcasting - Measures taken by the Netherlands authorities - Decision declaring State aid compatible in part and incompatible in part with the common market - New aid or existing aid - Concept of State aid - Concept of undertaking - Overcompensation for the costs of the public service mission - Proportionality - Duty to give reasons - Rights of the defence)
2011/C 38/11
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicants: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: H. Sevenster and M. de Grave, Agents) (Case T-231/06); and Nederlandse Omroep Stichting (NOS) (Hilversum, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Feenstra and H. Speyart van Woerden, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan and H. van Vliet, Agents)

Re:

Applications for the annulment of Commission Decision 2008/136/EC of 22 June 2006 on the ad hoc financing of Dutch public service broadcasters C 2/2004 (ex NN 170/2003) (OJ 2008 L 49, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the actions;










2.


orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs in Case T-231/06;










3.


orders Nederlandse Omroep Stichting (NOS) to pay the costs in Case T-237/06.






(1)  OJ C 261, of 28.10.2006.
Joined Cases T-444/08 to T-448/08: Order of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — FIFA v OHIM — Ferrero (WORLD CUP 2006 and Others)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, Switzerland, action for annulment, competition law, consumer protection, professional sport, trade-mark law








C_2011055EN.01003403.xml










19.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 55/34





Order of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — FIFA v OHIM — Ferrero (WORLD CUP 2006 and Others)
(Joined Cases T-444/08 to T-448/08) (1)

2011/C 55/62
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 313, 6.12.2008.
Increased European Union support for grassroots sports Declaration of the European Parliament of 16 December 2010 on increased European Union support for grassroots sports
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, economic and social cohesion, sport








CE2012169EN.01013801.xml










15.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 169/138





Thursday 16 December 2010Increased European Union support for grassroots sports
P7_TA(2010)0498
Declaration of the European Parliament of 16 December 2010 on increased European Union support for grassroots sports
2012/C 169 E/19

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 165 TFEU,










—


having regard to Rule 123 of its Rules of Procedure,










A.


whereas sport has become a new competence of the EU,










B.


whereas sport is an important factor in social cohesion and contributes to many policy objectives, such as health promotion, education, social integration, the fight against discrimination, culture as well as crime reduction and the fight against drug addiction,










C.


whereas the vast majority of Europeans participating in sport and recreational physical activity are engaged at a grassroots sports level,










D.


whereas the economic crisis and the pressure on governments’ spending could have serious consequences for funding of grassroots sports,










1.


Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote sport for all, strengthening its educational and integrating role, with special attention paid to under-represented groups such as women, seniors, and disabled people;










2.


Calls on Member States to ensure that grassroots sport does not suffer from major budget cuts in times of crisis;










3.


Calls on the Commission to pay the necessary attention to grassroots sports in the upcoming Communication on sport and to ensure sufficient funding for the EU Sport Programme from 2012 onwards;










4.


Calls on the Commission to take due account of the results of the study on the financing of grassroots sports with regard to a possible EU initiative on gambling issues;










5.


Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories (1), to the Commission and the Parliaments of the Member States.






(1)  The list of signatories is published in Annex 2 to the Minutes of 16 December 2010 (P7_PV(2010)12-16(ANN2)).
Notice of open competition
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, administrative competition, invitation to tender, translation








C_2010341EN.01004601.xml










16.12.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 341/46





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
2010/C 341/11
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising open competition EPSO/AST/112/10 — ASSISTANTS (AST 3) in the following fields:






1.


Statistics










2.


Finance/Accounting










3.


Human Resources










4.


Information and Communication Technology (ICT)




The competition notice is published in 23 languages in Official Journal C 341 A of 16 December 2010.
Further details can be found on the EPSO website: http://eu-careers.eu
Case T-568/10: Action brought on 16 December 2010 — Vivendi v Commission
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: action for annulment (EU), telecommunications, telecommunications industry








C_2011072EN.01001901.xml










5.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/19





Action brought on 16 December 2010 — Vivendi v Commission
(Case T-568/10)
2011/C 72/32
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Vivendi (Paris, France) (represented by: O. Fréget, J.-Y. Ollier and M. Struys, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present action admissible;










—


annul the Commission’s decision of 1 October 2010 by which it rejected the complaint lodged by Vivendi on 2 March 2009 (registered under number 2009/4267), for infringement by the French Republic of Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 December 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services and, consequently, Article 106(1) TFEU, by granting a regulatory advantage in refusing ARCEP the right to use its powers to force the incumbent operator to reimburse the operators seeking access to the local loop the sums charged in excess of the costs incurred in providing the service which is subject to cost-orientation;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the applicant before the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicant raises four pleas as regards the substance:






1.


The first plea is based on an error of law concerning the definition of a ‘special right’ within the meaning of Directive 2002/77/EC. (1)











2.


The second plea is based on the Commission's failure to comply with its duty to ensure application under Article 106(3) TFEU.










3.


The third plea is based on an error of law, in so far as the Commission wrongly considered that the obligation to orientate certain tariffs towards costs is not laid down in a European Union directive, but is the responsibility of the national regulator.










4.


The fourth plea is based on an error of law in that the Commission considered that the rights of the private operators were not infringed since they could resort to the national commercial law courts to obtain reimbursements of the excessively high sums levied by France Télécom, given that the complexity of such a case makes it impossible to fully exercise the right to reimbursement before those courts.






(1)  Commission Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services (OJ 2002 L 249, p. 21).
Case F-52/10: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 16 December 2010 — Merhzaoui v Council of the European Union
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Council of the European Union, action by staff, action for annulment, civil servant








C_2011046EN.01001603.xml










12.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/16





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 16 December 2010 — Merhzaoui v Council of the European Union
(Case F-52/10) (1)

2011/C 46/32
Language of the case: French
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 221, 14.8.2010, p. 61.
Case T-363/09: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Gruppo Lepetit (RESVEROL) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark RESVEROL — Earlier international word mark LESTEROL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, advertising, food supplement, health care, pharmaceutical product, special chemicals, trade-mark law








C_2011046EN.01001202.xml










12.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/12





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Longevity Health Products v OHIM — Gruppo Lepetit (RESVEROL)
(Case T-363/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark RESVEROL - Earlier international word mark LESTEROL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 46/23
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Longevity Health Products, Inc. (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: J. Korab, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Gruppo Lepetit SpA (Lainate, Italy)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 July 2009 (Case R 1204/2008-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Gruppo Lepetit SpA and Longevity Health Products, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Longevity Health Products, Inc., to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.
Case T-497/09: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — LG Electronics v OHIM (KOMPRESSOR PLUS) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark KOMPRESSOR PLUS — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2010-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, electronics industry, trade-mark law








C_2011046EN.01001203.xml










12.2.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/12





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — LG Electronics v OHIM (KOMPRESSOR PLUS)
(Case T-497/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark KOMPRESSOR PLUS - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 46/24
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, South Korea) (represented by: J. Blanchard, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 September 2009 (Case R 397/2009-1), relating to an application for registration as a Community trade mark of the word sign KOMPRESSOR PLUS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders LG Electronics, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 37, 13.2.2010.