do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
2011/237/CFSP: Political and Security Committee Decision Atalanta/1/2011 of 13 April 2011 on the appointment of an EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (Atalanta)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: Somalia, appointment of staff, deterrent, military intervention, military personnel, piracy, the EU's international role








L_2011100EN.01007201.xml










14.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 100/72








            POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION ATALANTA/1/2011
of 13 April 2011
         
on the appointment of an EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (Atalanta)
(2011/237/CFSP)


THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38 thereof,


Having regard to Council Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP of 10 November 2008 on a European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (1) (Atalanta), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 6 of Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take decisions on the appointment of the EU Force Commander.












(2)


On 26 November 2010, the PSC adopted Decision Atalanta/5/2010 (2) appointing Rear Admiral Juan RODRÍGUEZ GARAT as EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast.












(3)


The EU Operation Commander has recommended the appointment of Commodore Alberto Manuel Silvestre CORREIA as the new EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast.












(4)


The EU Military Committee supports that recommendation.












(5)


In accordance with Article 5 of the Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Commodore Alberto Manuel Silvestre CORREIA is hereby appointed EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on 14 April 2011.




Done at Brussels, 13 April 2011.


For the Political and Security Committee


The Chairman

O. SKOOG
            





(1)  
            OJ L 301, 12.11.2008, p. 33.

(2)  
            OJ L 320, 7.12.2010, p. 8.
Case F-105/09: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Scheefer v Parliament (Staff case — Temporary staff — Renewal of a fixed-term contract — Reclassification of a contract for a fixed period as a contract for an indefinite period — First paragraph of Article 8 of the CEOS)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Parliament, action by staff, agricultural equipment, indemnification, servant (EU), temporary employment, work contract








C_2011252EN.01005102.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/51





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Scheefer v Parliament
(Case F-105/09) (1)

(Staff case - Temporary staff - Renewal of a fixed-term contract - Reclassification of a contract for a fixed period as a contract for an indefinite period - First paragraph of Article 8 of the CEOS)
2011/C 252/110
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Séverine Scheefer (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: R. Adam and P. Ketter, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: R. Ignătescu and L. Chrétien, then by R. Ignătescu and S. Alves, agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the defendant’s decisions refusing to convert the applicant’s temporary staff contract into a contract for an indefinite period in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 8 of the CEOS, and application for compensation for the loss suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


annuls the decision contained in the letter of 12 February 2009 whereby the Secretary-General of the European Parliament informed Ms Scheefer, first, that it had not been possible to find any legally acceptable solution to enable her to continue working within the medical service at Luxembourg (Luxembourg) and, secondly, that her temporary staff contract would end on 31 March 2009;










2.


orders the European Parliament to pay to Ms Scheefer the difference between, (i) the amount of the remuneration which she would have earned if she had continued to be employed by the Parliament and (ii) the amount of the remuneration, fees, unemployment benefit or any other allowance in lieu which she has in fact received since 1 April 2009 in place of the remuneration which she was receiving as a member of the temporary staff;










3.


dismisses the action as to the remainder;










4.


orders the European Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay those of Ms Scheefer.






(1)  OJ C 37, 13.2.2010, p. 52.
Case T-202/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Deichmann v OHIM (Representation of a curved band with dotted lines) (Community trade mark — International registration designating the European Community — Figurative mark representing a curved band with dotted lines — Absolute ground for refusal — Absence of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01001801.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/18





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Deichmann v OHIM (Representation of a curved band with dotted lines)
(Case T-202/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - International registration designating the European Community - Figurative mark representing a curved band with dotted lines - Absolute ground for refusal - Absence of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2011/C 160/24
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deichmann SE, formerly Heinrich Deichmann-Scuhe GmbH & Co. KG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: O. Rauscher, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 April 2009 (Case R 224/2007-4) concerning an international registration designating the European Community of a figurative mark representing a curved band with dotted lines

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Deichmann SE to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.
Case T-228/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — United States Polo Association v OHIM — Textiles CMG (U.S. POLO ASSN.) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark U.S. POLO ASSN. — Earlier Community and national word marks POLO-POLO — 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: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), fine, trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01001901.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/19





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — United States Polo Association v OHIM — Textiles CMG (U.S. POLO ASSN.)
(Case T-228/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark U.S. POLO ASSN. - Earlier Community and national word marks POLO-POLO - 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))
2011/C 160/26
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: United States Polo Association (Lexington, Kentucky, United States) (represented by: P. Goldenbaum, I. Rohr and T. Melchert, lawyers)

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: Textiles CMG, SA (Onteniente, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2009 (Case R 886/2008-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Textiles CMG, SA and United States Polo Association.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders United States Polo Association to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.
Case T-262/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Safariland v OHIM — DEF-TEC Defense Technology (FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Implementation by OHIM of a judgment annulling a decision adopted by one of the OHIM Boards of Appeal — Rights of the defence — Obligation to state reasons — Articles 63(2), 65(6), 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), aerosol, innovation, personal weapon, self-defence, trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01001902.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/19





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Safariland v OHIM — DEF-TEC Defense Technology (FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR)
(Case T-262/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Implementation by OHIM of a judgment annulling a decision adopted by one of the OHIM Boards of Appeal - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons - Articles 63(2), 65(6), 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009)
2011/C 160/27
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Safariland LLC, formerly Defense Technology Corporation of America (Jacksonville, Florida, United States) (represented by: R. Kunze and G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: DEF-TEC Defense Technology GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented: initially by H. Daniel and O. Haleen, and subsequently by O. Haleen, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 May 2009 (Case R 493/2002-4 (II)), relating to opposition proceedings between Defense Technology Corporation of America and DEF-TEC Defense Technology GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Safariland LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and by DEF-TEC Defense Technology GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 205, 29.8.2009.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 351/2011 of 11 April 2011 amending Regulation (EU) No 297/2011 imposing special conditions governing the import of feed and food originating in or consigned from Japan following the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power station ( OJ L 97, 12.4.2011 )
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Japan, foodstuff, foodstuffs legislation, health control, health risk, human nutrition, import (EU), nuclear accident, product safety, radioactive pollution








L_2011098EN.01001601.xml










13.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 98/16







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 351/2011 of 11 April 2011 amending Regulation (EU) No 297/2011 imposing special conditions governing the import of feed and food originating in or consigned from Japan following the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power station
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 97 of 12 April 2011
)

On page 23, Annex II is replaced as follows:




                           ‘ANNEX II

Maximum levels for foodstuffs
 (1)
(Bq/kg)










 


Foods for infants and young children


Milk and dairy products


Other foodstuffs, except liquid foodstuffs


Liquid foodstuffs




Sum of Isotopes of strontium, notably Sr-90


75 


125 


750 


125 




Sum of Isotopes of iodine, notably I-131


100  (2)



300  (2)



2 000 


300  (2)





Sum of Alpha-emitting isotopes of plutonium and trans-plutonium elements, notably Pu-239, Am-241


1 


1  (2)



10  (2)



1  (2)





Sum of all other nuclides of half-life greater than 10 days, notably Cs-134 and Cs-137, except C-14 and H-3


200  (2)



200  (2)



500  (2)



200  (2)









Maximum levels for feedingstuffs
 (3)
(Bq/kg)







 


Feedingstuffs




Sum of Cs-134 and Cs-137


500  (4)





Sum of Isotopes of iodine, notably I-131


2 000  (5)










(1)  The level applicable to concentrated or dried products is calculated on the basis of the reconstituted product as ready for consumption.

(2)  In order to ensure consistency with action levels currently applied in Japan, these values replace on a provisional basis the values laid down in Council Regulation (Euratom) No 3954/87.

(3)  Maximum level is relative to a feed with a moisture content of 12 %.’
         

(4)  In order to ensure consistency with action levels currently applied in Japan, this value replaces on a provisional basis the value laid down in Commission Regulation (Euratom) No 770/90.

(5)  This value is laid down on a provisional basis and taken to be the same as for foodstuffs, pending an assessment of transfer factors of iodine from feedingstuffs to food products.
Case T-358/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Sociedad Agricola Requingua v OHIM — Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Toro (TORO DE PIEDRA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark TORO DE PIEDRA — Earlier Community figurative mark D. ORIGEN TORO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Right to be heard — Obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is based — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01002002.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/20





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Sociedad Agricola Requingua v OHIM — Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Toro (TORO DE PIEDRA)
(Case T-358/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark TORO DE PIEDRA - Earlier Community figurative mark D. ORIGEN TORO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Right to be heard - Obligation to state the reasons on which a decision is based - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
2011/C 160/30
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sociedad Agricola Requingua Ltda (Santiago, Chile) (represented by: E. Vorbuchner, C. Ley and M. Heidelberg, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Toro (Toro, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 June 2009 (Case R 1117/2008-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Consejo Regulador de la Denominación de Origen Toro and Sociedad Agricola Requingua Ltda.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sociedad Agricola Requingua Ltda to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.
Case T-413/10 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Socitrel v Commission (Application for interim measures — Competition — Commission decision imposing a fine — Bank guarantee — Application for suspension of operation — Pecuniary damage — No exceptional circumstances — No urgency)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment, fine, legal expenses








C_2011179EN.01001601.xml










18.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 179/16





Order of the President of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Socitrel v Commission
(Case T-413/10 R)
(Application for interim measures - Competition - Commission decision imposing a fine - Bank guarantee - Application for suspension of operation - Pecuniary damage - No exceptional circumstances - No urgency)
2011/C 179/28
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Socitrel — Sociedade Industrial de Trefilaria, SA (Trofa, Portugal) (represented by: F. Proença de Carvalho and T. Luísa de Faria, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, V. Bottka and P. Costa de Oliveira, Agents, and M. Marques Mendes, lawyer)

Re:

Application for suspension of the operation of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a procedure pursuant to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Prestressed steel) and for waiver of the obligation to establish a bank guarantee in order to prevent the immediate recovery of the fine imposed under Article 2 of that decision.

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:






1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed;










2.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-98/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Tubesca v OHIM — Tubos del Mediterráneo (T TUMESA TUBOS DEL MEDITERRANEO S.A.) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark T TUMESA TUBOS DEL MEDITERRANEO S.A. — Earlier national word mark and international figurative mark TUBESCA — Relative ground of refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), building industry, construction equipment, trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01001702.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/17





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Tubesca v OHIM — Tubos del Mediterráneo (T TUMESA TUBOS DEL MEDITERRANEO S.A.)
(Case T-98/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark T TUMESA TUBOS DEL MEDITERRANEO S.A. - Earlier national word mark and international figurative mark TUBESCA - Relative ground of refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2011/C 160/23
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Tubesca (Ailly-sur-Noye, France) (represented by: F. Greffe, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Tubos del Mediterráneo S.A. (Sagunto, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 December 2008 (Case R 518/2008-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Tubesca and Tubos del Mediterráneo S.A.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Tubesca to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
Case F-29/09 REV: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Lebedef and Jones v Commission (Civil service — Revision of a judgment — No new facts — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: family benefit, legal expenses, rights of civil servants








C_2011252EN.01004902.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/49





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Lebedef and Jones v Commission
(Case F-29/09 REV)
(Civil service - Revision of a judgment - No new facts - Inadmissibility)
2011/C 252/104
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Giorgio Lebedef (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) and Trevor Jones (Ernzen, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, Agents)

Intervener: Council of the European Union (represented by: K. Zieleśkiewicz and M. Bauer, Agents)

Re:

Action by the applicants for revision of a judgment delivered by the Third Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal on 30 September 2010 in Case F-29/09

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the application for revision as inadmissible;










2.


Orders Mr. Lebedef and Mr. Jones to pay all the costs;










3.


Orders the Council of the European Union, the intervener, to bear its own costs.