do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-49/11: Action brought on 18 April 2011 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, health expenditure, indemnification, medical data








C_2011186EN.01003601.xml










25.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 186/36





Action brought on 18 April 2011 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-49/11)
2011/C 186/68
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: B. Rohde-Liebenau, advocate)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision of the European Commission refusing the applicant's request to take out certain documents from his medical file and a claim for damages.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal should:






—


Annul the decision of 17 January 2011 by the AIPN (No R/588jlO);










—


order the Commission to make a payment to the applicant as reimbursement for medical costs in the amount of 363,23 EUR;










—


order the Commission to provide access to the complete personal file including all medical files to the applicant's named doctor,






—


or alternatively by sending it to the legal representative of the applicant in this procedure;










—


or alternatively, by providing access to a copy of the entire file;










—


or alternatively, by providing electronic access to the entire file;














—


order the Commission to declare that no parallel or additional personal or medical files exist;






—


or alternatively, order the Commission to delete any such additional files and any copies thereof,










—


or alternatively, order the Commission to insert their full content in the regular personal file (or its medical file);














—


order the Commission to pay a compensation for the damage suffered on account of the infringement of his fundamental rights undermining his honour and reputation in an amount deemed appropriate ex aequo et bono by the Tribunal and according to its precedents, but not less than one yearly net income of the applicant at the time of his regular service for the defendant immediately preceding the incident of 2000;










—


order the Commission to make a payment to the applicant of a lump sum of 717 863,04 EUR equal to eight times his annual basic salary calculated on the basis of the amounts of salary received during the twelve months before the accident in accordance with Article 73(2b) of the Staff Regulations;






—


or alternatively a fraction thereof, as deemed appropriate by the Tribunal ex aequo et bono;














—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case C-179/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 18 April 2011 — CIMADE, Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigrés (GISTI) v Ministre de l’Intérieur, de l’Outre-Mer, des Collectivités Territoriales et de l’Immigration
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, financial aid, foreign national, right of asylum








C_2011186EN.01001302.xml










25.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 186/13





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 18 April 2011 — CIMADE, Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigrés (GISTI) v Ministre de l’Intérieur, de l’Outre-Mer, des Collectivités Territoriales et de l’Immigration
(Case C-179/11)
2011/C 186/23
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: CIMADE, Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigrés (GISTI)

Defendant: Ministre de l’Intérieur, de l’Outre-Mer, des Collectivités Territoriales et de l’Immigration

Questions referred







1.


Does Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 (1) guarantee the minimum reception conditions to which it refers to applicants in respect of whom a Member State in receipt of an application for asylum decides, under Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003, (2) to refer a request to another Member State which it deems to have jurisdiction to examine that asylum application, throughout the duration of the procedure for taking charge of them or for taking them back by that other Member State?










2.


If the answer to that question is in the affirmative:






(a)


Does the obligation, incumbent on the first Member State, to guarantee the minimum reception conditions cease at the moment of the acceptance decision by the State to which the referral was made, upon the actual taking charge or taking back of the asylum seeker, or at some other date?










(b)


Which Member State should thus assume the financial burden of providing the minimum reception conditions during that period?










(1)  Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers (OJ 2003 L 31, p. 18).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ 2003 L 50, p. 1).
Case C-183/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2011 — Econord SpA v Comune di Solbiate and Comune di Varese
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, local government, organisation, provision of services, public institution








C_2011211EN.01001101.xml










16.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 211/11





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2011 — Econord SpA v Comune di Solbiate and Comune di Varese
(Case C-183/11)
2011/C 211/20
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Econord SpA

Defendants: Comune di Solbiate and Comune di Varese

Interested party: Aspem SpA

Question referred

Must the principle that the position of an individual public authority holding shares in a società strumentale [(a company set up to provide certain municipal services)] is immaterial also apply where one of the partner municipalities holds a single share in the società strumentale and the shareholders’ agreements entered into by the partner public authorities are not such as to give the shareholding municipality any effective power of control over the company, with the result that the company shareholding may be regarded merely as formal cover for a contract for the provision of services?
Case C-180/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 18 April 2011 — Bericap Záródástechnikai Bt. v Plastinnova 2000 Kft.
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, interpretation of the law, patent law








C_2011232EN.01001103.xml










6.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/11






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 18 April 2011 — Bericap Záródástechnikai Bt. v Plastinnova 2000 Kft.
(Case C-180/11)
(2011/C 232/20)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bericap Záródástechnikai Bt.

Defendant: Plastinnova 2000 Kft.

Intervener: Szellemi Tulajdon Nemzeti Hivatala (Hungarian Intellectual Property Office) (formerly Magyar Szabadalmi Hivatal (Hungarian Patent Office))

Questions referred







1.


Is it consistent with European Union law if, during proceedings to amend a decision relating to an application for invalidation of a utility model, the measures, procedures and legal remedies are applied in such a way that: the national court is not bound by the claims or statements with legal effect made by the parties, and the court is entitled to order of its own motion any evidence that it may deem necessary?










2.


Is it consistent with European Union law if, during proceedings to amend a decision relating to an application for invalidation of a utility model, the measures, procedures and legal remedies are applied in such a way that: the national court, when making its decision, is not bound by the administrative decision made in relation to the application for invalidation, or by the findings established therein, nor, specifically, by the grounds for invalidation indicated during the administrative procedure, or by the declarations, assertions or evidence submitted during the administrative procedure?










3.


Is it consistent with European Union law if, during proceedings to amend a decision relating to a further application aimed at invalidating a utility model, the measures, procedures and legal remedies are applied in such a way that: the national court excludes any evidence submitted with the further application, including evidence relating to the state of the art, to which reference was already made in connection with the previous application for invalidation of a utility model?
Case C-182/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2011 — Econord SpA v Comune di Cagno and Comune di Varese
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, local government, organisation, provision of services, public institution








C_2011211EN.01001003.xml










16.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 211/10





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 18 April 2011 — Econord SpA v Comune di Cagno and Comune di Varese
(Case C-182/11)
2011/C 211/19
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Econord SpA

Defendants: Comune di Cagno and Comune di Varese

Interested party: Aspem SpA

Question referred

Must the principle that the position of an individual public authority holding shares in a società strumentale [(a company set up to provide certain municipal services)] is immaterial also apply where one of the partner municipalities holds a single share in the società strumentale and the shareholders’ agreements entered into by the partner public authorities are not such as to give the shareholding municipality any effective power of control over the company, with the result that the company shareholding may be regarded merely as formal cover for a contract for the provision of services?
Case C-185/11: Action brought on 18 April 2011 — European Commission v Republic of Slovenia
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Slovenia, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure








C_2011269EN.01002002.xml










10.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/20





Action brought on 18 April 2011 — European Commission v Republic of Slovenia
(Case C-185/11)
2011/C 269/37
Language of the case: Slovene

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: K.-Ph. Wojcik, M. Žebre and N. Yerrell, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Slovenia

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that, by failing to implement, correctly and fully, in its own legal order Council Directives 73/239/EEC (1) and 92/49/EEC, (2) the Republic of Slovenia has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 8(3) of Directive 73/239/EEC and Articles 29 and 39 of Directive 92/49/EEC, and its obligations under Articles 56 and 63 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union;










—


order the Republic of Slovenia to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for the transposition of Directives 73/239/EEC and 92/49/EEC expired on 1 May 2004.


(1)  OJ 1973 L 228, p. 3.

(2)  OJ 1992 L 228, p. 1.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 382/2011 of 18 April 2011 entering a name in the register of traditional specialities guaranteed ( ‘Kiełbasa myśliwska’ (TSG))
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Poland, location of production, meat product, originating product, product designation








L_2011103EN.01000601.xml










19.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 103/6








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 382/2011
of 18 April 2011
         
entering a name in the register of traditional specialities guaranteed (‘Kiełbasa myśliwska’ (TSG))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 of 20 March 2006 on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 9(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006, Poland’s application to register the name ‘Kiełbasa myśliwska’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


Pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006, a statement of objection was sent to the Commission, substantiated under Article 9(3)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006. In its letter dated 27 January 2010, the Commission invited the interested parties to hold appropriate consultations.












(3)


Given that an agreement was reached within 6 months without modification of the details published in accordance with the provisions referred to in Article 8(2), the Commission must adopt a decision.












(4)


In the light of the above, this name must therefore be registered.












(5)


The protection referred to in Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 has not been requested,





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, 18 April 2011.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





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

(2)  
            OJ C 160, 14.7.2009, p. 12.




ANNEX
Products listed in Annex I to the EC Treaty, intended for human consumption:

Class 1.2.   Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.)

POLAND
Kiełbasa myśliwska (TSG)
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 380/2011 of 18 April 2011 opening a tariff quota for certain quantities of industrial sugar for the 2011/2012 marketing year
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: import, sugar, sugar industry, tariff quota








L_2011103EN.01000401.xml










19.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 103/4








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 380/2011
of 18 April 2011
         
opening a tariff quota for certain quantities of industrial sugar for the 2011/2012 marketing year


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 142, in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


In order to ensure that the supply necessary for the production of the products referred to in Article 62(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 is available at a price that corresponds to the world price, it is in the interest of the Union to suspend the import duties on sugar intended for the production of those products for the 2011/2012 marketing year, for a quantity that would correspond to half of its industrial sugar needs.












(2)


Commission Regulation (EC) No 891/2009 of 25 September 2009 opening and providing for the administration of certain Community tariff quotas in the sugar sector (2) provides for the administration of the tariff quotas for imports of sugar products under Article 142 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 with order number 09.4390 (industrial import sugar). However, in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 891/2009 the quantities of those products for which import duties are to be suspended has to be determined by a separate legal act.












(3)


The import quantities of industrial sugar for which no import duties should apply for the 2011/2012 marketing year, need to be set accordingly.












(4)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The import duties for industrial sugar falling within CN 1701  and with order number 09.4390 shall be suspended for a quantity of 400 000 tonnes from 1 October 2011 to 30 September 2012.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
It shall apply from 1 October 2011.
It shall expire on 30 September 2012.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 April 2011.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 254, 26.9.2009, p. 82.
Europe in figures : Eurostat yearbook 2010.
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: Eurostat
Subjects: EU statistics, statistics

K
S
-
C
D
-
1
0
-
2
2
0
-
E
N
-
C

E
u
r
o
p
e
i

n
fi
g
u
r
e
s

E
u
r
o
s
t
a
t
y
e
a
r
b
o
o
k
2
0
1
0

ISSN 1681-4789

S t a t i s t i c a l   b o o k s

Europe in figures

Eurostat yearbook 2010

Europe in figures
Eurostat yearbook 2010

Europe in figures – Eurostat yearbook 2010 – 
presents a comprehensive selection of statistical 
data on Europe. With just over 450 statistical 
tables, graphs and maps, the yearbook is a 
definitive collection of statistical information on 
the European Union. Most data cover the period 
1998-2008 for the European Union and its Member 
States, while some indicators are provided for 
other countries, such as candidate countries to 
the European Union, members of EFTA, Japan or 
the United States. The yearbook deals with the 
following areas: the economy; population; health; 
education; the labour market; living conditions and 
welfare; industry and services; agriculture, forestry 
and fisheries; trade; transport; environment and 
energy; science and technology; and Europe’s 
regions. This edition’s spotlight chapter covers 
national accounts statistics – with a particular 
focus on the economic downturn observed 
during 2008/2009. 

The yearbook may be viewed as a key reference 
for those wishing to know more about 
European statistics, providing guidance to the 
vast range of data freely available from the 
Eurostat website at:
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat 

Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: EUR 30

I S B N   9 7 8 - 9 2 - 7 9 - 1 4 8 8 4 - 2

9

7 8 9 2 7 9 1 4 8 8 4 2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS 

Free publications: 

•  via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); 

•  at the European Union’s representations or delegations. You can obtain their 

contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax  
to +352 2929-42758. 

Priced publications: 

•  via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu). 

Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the 
European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice  
of the European Union): 

•  via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union 

(http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).
Case T-220/11: Action brought on 18 April 2011 — TeamBank v OHIM — Fercredit Servizi Finanziari (f@ir Credit)
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011194EN.01001602.xml










2.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/16





Action brought on 18 April 2011 — TeamBank v OHIM — Fercredit Servizi Finanziari (f@ir Credit)
(Case T-220/11)
2011/C 194/26
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: TeamBank AG Nürnberg (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: T. Kiphuth, H. Lindner and D. Terheggen, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fercredit Servizi Finanziari SpA (Rome, Italy)

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 February 2011 in Appeal R 719/2010-1;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘f@ir Credit’ for services in Class 36 (Registration No 6 947 766).

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Fercredit Servizi Finanziari SpA.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark ‘FERCREDIT’ for goods and services in Classes 6, 7, 12, 14, 16, 18, 25, 35, 36, 39, 41, 42, 43 and 44 (Community trade mark Nr 3 749 801), the opposition being brought against the registration of services in Class 36.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) as there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version), (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-216/11: Action brought on 18 April 2011 — Progust v OHIM — Sopralex & Vosmarques (IMPERIA)
Date: 2011-04-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011194EN.01001502.xml










2.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/15





Action brought on 18 April 2011 — Progust v OHIM — Sopralex & Vosmarques (IMPERIA)
(Case T-216/11)
2011/C 194/24
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Progust, SL (Girona, Spain) (represented by: M. E. López Camba and J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sopralex & Vosmarques SA (Brussels, Belgium)

Form of order sought

The applicant requests the Court to:






—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal in Case R 1036/2010-1 in its entirety;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs incurred by Progust, SL;










—


order Sopralex & Vosmarques SA to pay the costs incurred by Progust, SL.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Progust, SL.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘IMPERIA’ (application for registration No 7.008.154), for goods and services in Classes 29, 30, 31, 32 and 43.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Sopralex & Vosmarques SA.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community figurative mark (No 3.260.288), containing the word element ‘IMPERIAL’ for goods in Class 29.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld and application for registration refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Incorrect interpretation and application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009