do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-412/11: Action brought on 28 July 2011 — Maharishi Foundation v OHIM (TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION)
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, registered trade mark








C_2011282EN.01004102.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/41





Action brought on 28 July 2011 — Maharishi Foundation v OHIM (TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION)
(Case T-412/11)
2011/C 282/78
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Maharishi Foundation Ltd (St. Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Meijboom, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 March 2011 in case R 1293/2010-2;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION’ for goods and services in classes 16, 41, 44 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 8246647

Decision of the Examiner: Rejected the application for a Community trade mark, for part of the goods and services

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the Examination Division for further prosecution

Pleas in law: The applicant puts forward four pleas in law: (i) infringement of Articles 75 and 7(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal did not explicitly decided on Article 7(1)(a) of CTMR, but did, nevertheless, consider that the mark ‘TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION’ is generic; (ii) infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly decided that the mark is devoid of any distinctive character; (iii) infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly concluded that the mark consists exclusively of indications, which may serve, in trade, to designate characteristics of the goods or services, for which applicant filed the mark; and (iv) infringement of Article 7(3) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal incorrectly decided that the mark has not become distinctive in relation to the goods or services, for which registration is requested in consequence of the use, which has been made of it.
Summary information communicated by Member States on State aid granted in conformity with Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2008 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of fisheries products  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Ireland, State aid, control of State aid, fishery product, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2011222EN.01000401.xml










28.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/4





Summary information communicated by Member States on State aid granted in conformity with Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2008 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of fisheries products
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 222/05
Aid No: XF 35/10
Member State: Ireland
Region/Authority granting the aid: An Bord Iascaigh Mhara
Title of aid scheme/Name of company receiving an ad hoc aid: Seafood Category Management Scheme
Legal basis: Sea Fisheries Act 1952 (No 7 of 1952)
Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or amount of ad hoc aid granted: EUR 400 000
Maximum aid intensity: Up to maximum of 40 % of eligible private sector projects and up to 100 % of public projects carried out in the collective interest by public bodies and/or research institutions
Date of entry into force: Operative date 1 November 2010
Duration of the scheme or individual aid award (not later than 30 June 2014); indicate: 






—


under the scheme: aid will be granted until 30 June 2014










—


in the case of an ad hoc aid: the expected date of the last installment to be paid: not applicable




Objective of aid: The objective of the scheme is to support common interest projects which aid the sustainable development of key seafood categories; pelagic, whitefish, shellfish and salmon.
This scheme is being paid under Articles 17, 20, 21 and 23 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2008 of 22 July 2008.
Indicate which of Articles 8 to 24 is used: Articles 17, 20, 21 and 23
Activity concerned: Seafood production and processing sectors
Name and address of the granting authority: 





An Bord Iascaigh Mhara




PO Box 12




Crofton Road




Dún Laoghaire




Co. Dublin




IRELAND




Web address where the full text of the scheme or the criteria and conditions under which ad hoc aid is granted outside of an aid scheme can be found: http://www.bim.ie/templates/text_content.asp?node_id=1085
Motivation: indicate why a State aid scheme has been established instead of assistance under the European Fisheries Fund: The funding allocated to Ireland from the European Fisheries Fund was prioritised for other measures, in particular, Decommissioning of the fishing fleet, Environmentally friendly systems for fisheries, Inshore management of fisheries and Axis 4 (Development of coastal communities).
Case T-411/11: Action brought on 28 July 2011 — Hemofarm v OHIM — Laboratorios Diafarm (HEMOFARM)
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01004403.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/44





Action brought on 28 July 2011 — Hemofarm v OHIM — Laboratorios Diafarm (HEMOFARM)
(Case T-411/11)
2011/C 311/83
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Hemofarm AD farmaceutsko-hemijska industrija Vršac (Vršac, Serbia) (represented by: D. Cañadas Arcas)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Laboratorios Diafarm, SA (Barberá del Vallès, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


stay the proceedings brought by the applicant before the General Court in its action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 May 2011 until OHIM and Barcelona Commercial Courts Nos 4 and 8 have adjudicated upon the applications for a declaration of invalidity and for revocation on grounds of non-use;










—


in the alternative, review, annul or, if necessary, vary decision R 298/2010-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal as regards the contested goods in Class 5, so as to reject opposition B 996 506 in relation to that class, and consequently grant the applicant’s application for Community trade mark No 4 504 049‘HEMOFARM’ for all the goods in Class 5 and register that mark in Classes 5 and 35 as sought.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘HEMOFARM’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 35.

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community and international word mark ‘HEMOFARM’ for goods in Classes 3 and 16 and national word marks ‘HEMOPLANT’ and ‘HEMONET’ for goods in Class 5.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

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


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case C-215/10: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (United Kingdom)) — Pacific World Limited, FDD International Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Moulded plastic false nail sets — Validity of Regulation (EC) No 1417/2007 — Other articles of plastics (heading 3926 ) — Manicure or pedicure preparations (heading 3304 ) — Manicure or pedicure sets and instruments (heading 8214 ))
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, cosmetic product, plastics








C_2011298EN.01000703.xml










8.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/7





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (United Kingdom)) — Pacific World Limited, FDD International Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
(Case C-215/10) (1)

(Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Moulded plastic false nail sets - Validity of Regulation (EC) No 1417/2007 - Other articles of plastics (heading 3926) - Manicure or pedicure preparations (heading 3304) - Manicure or pedicure sets and instruments (heading 8214))
2011/C 298/12
Language of the case: English

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Pacific World Limited, FDD International Limited

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — Interpretation of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1417/2007 of 28 November 2007 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature — Validity of the classification of moulded plastic false nails under heading 3926 90 97 (Other articles of plastics or other materials)

Operative part of the judgment

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1417/2007 of 28 November 2007 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature is valid in so far as it classifies the false nails and, thereby, the false nail sets described in its annex under subheading 3926 90 97 of the Combined Nomenclature, set out in 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, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1549/2006 of 17 October 2006.


(1)  OJ C 209, 31.7.2010.
Corrigendum to calls for proposals and a prize under the 2011 and 2012 work programmes of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities ( OJ C 213, 20.7.2011 )
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, proposal (EU), research, technological change








C_2011222EN.01002001.xml










28.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/20





Corrigendum to calls for proposals and a prize under the 2011 and 2012 work programmes of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 213 of 20 July 2011
)
2011/C 222/14
On page 24, Cooperation Specific Programme:
for:













‘4.


Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and new Production Technologies






FP7-NMP-2011-CSA-6’





read:













‘4.


Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and new Production Technologies






FP7-NMP-2012-CSA-6’
Case C-403/10 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 July 2011 — Mediaset SpA v European Commission, Sky Italia Srl (Appeal — Subsidies granted by the Italian Republic to promote the purchase of digital decoders — Non-inclusion of decoders for the reception solely of television programmes broadcast by satellite — Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the common market)
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, common market, high-definition television, sales aid








C_2011298EN.01000903.xml










8.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/9





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 July 2011 — Mediaset SpA v European Commission, Sky Italia Srl
(Case C-403/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Subsidies granted by the Italian Republic to promote the purchase of digital decoders - Non-inclusion of decoders for the reception solely of television programmes broadcast by satellite - Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the common market)
2011/C 298/17
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Mediaset SpA (represented by: K. Adamantopoulos, dikigoros, G. Rossi, avvocato, E. Petritsi, dikigoros)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Martenczuk and B. Stromsky, Agents), Sky Italia Srl (represented by: F. González Díaz, abogado and F. Salerno, avocat)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 15 June 2010 in Case T-177/07 Mediaset SpA v Commission dismissing an action for the annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2006) 6634 final of 24 January 2007 declaring incompatible with the common market subsidies granted by Italy, in 2004 and 2005, to enable consumers to purchase or to rent interactive digital decoders capable of receiving programmes using digital or cable terrestrial technology on the ground that those subsidies exclude decoders capable of receiving programmes using satellite television broadcasting technology (Aid No C 52/2005, ex NN 88/2005, ex CP 101/2004)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mediaset SpA to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the European Commission and of Sky Italia Srl.






(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
Commission notice pursuant to Article 16(4) 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 — Modification of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, air transport, inland transport, public service, transport regulations








C_2011222EN.01000301.xml










28.7.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/3





Commission notice pursuant to Article 16(4) 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
Modification of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 222/04






Member State


Italy




Route concerned


Reggio Calabria–Milano Malpensa and vice versa
Reggio Calabria–Pisa San Giusto and vice versa
Reggio Calabria–Torino Caselle and vice versa




Original date of entry into force of the public service obligations


27 June 2011




Date of entry into force of modifications


19 September 2011 (new date of entry into force of the PSO)




Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained


For further information please contact:





ENAC (Ente Nazionale per l’Aviazione Civile)




Direzione Sviluppo Trasporto Aereo




Viale del Castro Pretorio 118




00185 Roma RM




ITALIA




http://www.enac.gov.it




E-mail: osp@enac.gov.it
Case F-75/11: Action brought on 28 July 2011 — ZZ v Council
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, promotion, servant (EU)








C_2011305EN.01001101.xml










15.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/11





Action brought on 28 July 2011 — ZZ v Council
(Case F-75/11)
2011/C 305/13
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Appointing Authority’s decision not to promote the applicant to Grade AST 7 in the 2007 promotion exercise

Form of order sought







—


Annulment of the Appointing Authority’s decision of 18 April 2011 to reject the applicant’s complaint against the decision not to promote him to Grade AST 7 in the 2007 promotion exercise;










—


So far as necessary, annulment of the Appointing Authority’s decision not to promote the applicant to Grade AST 7 in the 2007 promotion exercise;










—


An order that the Council pay the costs.
Case C-401/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 28 July 2011 — Blanka Soukupová v Ministerstvo zemědělství
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EAGGF, age discrimination, retirement conditions, rural development, transfer of farms








C_2011311EN.01001901.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/19





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 28 July 2011 — Blanka Soukupová v Ministerstvo zemědělství
(Case C-401/11)
2011/C 311/31
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Blanka Soukupová

Defendant: Ministerstvo zemědělství

Questions referred







1.


May the concept of ‘normal retirement age’ at the time of transfer of a farm under Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (1) be interpreted as ‘the age required for entitlement to a retirement pension’ by a particular applicant under national legislation?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is it in accordance with European Union law and the general principles of European Union law for ‘normal retirement age’ at the time of transfer of a farm to be determined differently for individual applicants depending on their sex and the number of children they have brought up?










3.


If the answer to the first question is in the negative, what criteria should the national court take into account when interpreting the concept of ‘normal retirement age’ at the time of transfer of a farm under Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations?






(1)  OJ 1999 L 160, p. 80.
Case C-427/09: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom)) — Generics (UK) Ltd v Synaptech Inc (Patent law — Medicinal products — Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products — Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 — Article 2 — Scope)
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European patent, drug surveillance, market approval, packaging, pharmaceutical product








C_2011298EN.01000301.xml










8.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/3





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom)) — Generics (UK) Ltd v Synaptech Inc
(Case C-427/09) (1)

(Patent law - Medicinal products - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products - Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 - Article 2 - Scope)
2011/C 298/04
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Generics (UK) Ltd

Defendant: Synaptech Inc

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) — Interpretation of Article 13(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 of 18 June 1992 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (OJ 1992 L 182, p. 1) — Concept of first authorisation to place the product on the market — Account taken only of authorisations issued in accordance with Council Directive 65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to medicinal products (OJ, English Special Edition 1965-1966, p. 24) — Authorisation delivered in accordance with the legislation applicable in Austria before the latter acceded to the EEA.

Operative part of the judgment

A product, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which was placed on the market in the European Community as a medicinal product for human use before obtaining a marketing authorisation in accordance with Council Directive 65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to medicinal products, as amended by Council Directive 89/341/EEC of 3 May 1989, and, in particular, without undergoing safety and efficacy testing, is not within the scope of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 of 18 June 1992 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products, as amended by the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded, as that scope is defined in Article 2 of that regulation, as amended, and may not be the subject of a supplementary protection certificate.


(1)  OJ C 11, 16.1.2010.
Case C-350/10: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland)) — proceedings brought by Nordea Pankki Suomi Oyj (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13B(d)(3) and (5) — Exemptions — Transfers and payments — Transactions in securities — Electronic messaging services for financial institutions)
Date: 2011-07-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, banking, electronic mail, financial institution, securities, tax exemption








C_2011298EN.01000902.xml










8.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/9





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland)) — proceedings brought by Nordea Pankki Suomi Oyj
(Case C-350/10) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Sixth VAT Directive - Article 13B(d)(3) and (5) - Exemptions - Transfers and payments - Transactions in securities - Electronic messaging services for financial institutions)
2011/C 298/16
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein hallinto-oikeus

Party to the main proceedings

Nordea Pankki Suomi Oyj

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Korkein hallinto-oikeus — Interpretation of Article 13B(d)(3) and (5) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Exemptions for banking transactions — SWIFT services for banks

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(d)(3) and (5) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax under that provision does not cover electronic messaging services for financial institutions, such as those at issue in the main proceedings.


(1)  OJ C 246, 11.9.2010.