do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-408/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Münster (Germany) lodged on 1 August 2011 — Criminal proceedings against Thomas Karl-Heinz Kerkhoff
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, driving licence, harmonisation of standards








C_2011311EN.01002002.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/20





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Münster (Germany) lodged on 1 August 2011 — Criminal proceedings against Thomas Karl-Heinz Kerkhoff
(Case C-408/11)
2011/C 311/34
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Münster (Germany)

Parties to the main proceedings

Thomas Karl-Heinz Kerkhoff
Staatsanwaltschaft Münster

Question referred

Is Article 11(4) of Directive 2006/126/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a Member State is entitled to refuse, on a long-term basis, to recognise a driving licence issued by another Member State, if the holder previously had his driving licence withdrawn on the territory of the first Member State, without a separate period of suspension before a new licence is issued having been imposed or a period of suspension imposed having expired?


(1)  Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (Recast); OJ 2006 L 403, p. 18.
Council Implementing Decision 2011/488/CFSP of 1 August 2011 implementing Decision 2011/273/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Syria, international sanctions, natural person








L_2011199EN.01007401.xml










2.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 199/74








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION 2011/488/CFSP
of 1 August 2011
         
implementing Decision 2011/273/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 31(2) thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP of 9 May 2011 concerning restrictive measures against Syria (1), and in particular Article 5(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


On 9 May 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/273/CFSP.












(2)


In view of the gravity of the situation in Syria, additional persons should be added to the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures set out in the Annex to Decision 2011/273/CFSP,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The persons listed in the Annex to this Decision shall be added to the list of persons and entities set out in the Annex to Decision 2011/273/CFSP.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 1 August 2011.


For the Council


The President

M. DOWGIELEWICZ
            





(1)  
            OJ L 121, 10.5.2011, p. 11.




ANNEX

Persons referred to in Article 1

A.   Persons










 


Name


Identifying information (date of birth, place of birth…)


Reasons


Date of listing




1.


Mr Mohammad Mufleh


 


Head of Syrian Military Intelligence in the town of Hama, involved in the crackdown on demonstrators.


1.8.2011




2.


Major General Tawfiq Younes


 


Head of the Department for Internal Security of the General Intelligence Directorate; involved in violence against the civilian population.


1.8.2011




3.


Mr Mohammed Makhlouf (a.k.a. Abu Rami)


Born in Latakia, Syria, 19.10.1932


Close associate and maternal uncle of Bashar and Mahir al-Assad. Business associate and father of Rami, Ihab and Iyad Makhlouf.


1.8.2011




4.


Ayman Jabir


Born Latakia


Associate of Mahir al-Assad for the Shabiha militia. Directly involved in repression and violence against the civilian population and co-ordination of Shabiha militia groups


1.8.2011




5.


General Ali Habib Mahmoud


Born Tartous, 1939. Appointed Minister of Defence 3 June 2009


Minister of Defence. Responsible for conduct and operations of Syrian Armed Forces involved in repression and violence against the civilian population


1.8.2011
Case F-78/11: Action brought on 1st August 2011 — ZZ v European Central Bank
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: contract, disciplinary proceedings, indemnification








C_2011319EN.01003001.xml










29.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/30





Action brought on 1st August 2011 — ZZ v European Central Bank
(Case F-78/11)
2011/C 319/64
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank

The subject matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision terminating the Appellant’s contract due to a disciplinary proceeding concluded with the issuing of a written reprimand.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:






—


Annul the ECB Executive Board’s decision of 20 May 2011, received on 23 May 2011, terminating the Appellant’s contract with effect on 31 October 2011;










—


compensate the Appellant’s material prejudice as from 31 October 2011;










—


compensate the Appellant’s moral prejudice evaluated at 10 000 euros;










—


order the Defendant to pay the costs.
Case C-410/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 1 August 2011 — Pedro Espada Sánchez and Others v Iberia Líneas Aéreas de España S.A.
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, air transport, carrier, interpretation of the law, liability, personal effects








C_2011290EN.01000701.xml










1.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 290/7





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 1 August 2011 — Pedro Espada Sánchez and Others v Iberia Líneas Aéreas de España S.A.
(Case C-410/11)
2011/C 290/11
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Pedro Espada Sánchez and Others

Defendant: Iberia Líneas Aéreas de España S.A.

Questions referred







1.


Must the limit of 1 000 Special Drawing Rights per passenger, laid down in Article 22 of the Montreal Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concerning the liability of the carrier in the case of destruction, loss or damage of baggage, considered in conjunction with Article 3(3) of that convention, be interpreted as a maximum limit for each individual passenger where a number of passengers travelling check in their shared baggage together, regardless of whether there are fewer pieces of checked baggage than there are actual travellers?










2.


Or, on the contrary, must the limit to damages laid down in Article 22 of the Montreal Convention be interpreted as meaning that, for each piece of checked baggage, only one passenger may be entitled to claim compensation and that, accordingly, the maximum limit applied must be that fixed for a single passenger even if it is proved that the lost baggage identified by a single tag belongs to more than one passenger?
Case T-415/11: Action brought on 1 August 2011 — Hartmann v OHIM (Nutriskin Protection Complex)
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011298EN.01002101.xml










8.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/21





Action brought on 1 August 2011 — Hartmann v OHIM (Nutriskin Protection Complex)
(Case T-415/11)
2011/C 298/38
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Paul Hartmann AG (Heidenheim an der Brenz, Germany) (represented by N. Aicher, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 May 2011 in Case R 1524/2010-1;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs, including the costs of the appeal procedure before OHIM.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Wordmark ‘Nutriskin Protection Complex’ for Goods in Classes 3 and 5 — Application for registration Number 8 995 086.

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection of the application.

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

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009, since the Community trade mark application ‘Nutriskin Protection Complex’ in respect of the goods in Classes 3 and 5 is neither descriptive nor lacking in any distinctive character, because first the component ‘Nutriskin’ by reason of the unusual nature of the combination leads to a term, which creates no directly descriptive impression and because secondly the defendant did no more than infer the alleged lack of distinctive character from the descriptive significance of the registered trade mark.
Case F-76/11: Action brought on 1 August 2011 — ZZ v European Commission
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: expatriate worker, indemnification, servant (EU)








C_2011319EN.01002902.xml










29.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/29





Action brought on 1 August 2011 — ZZ v European Commission
(Case F-76/11)
2011/C 319/63
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: R. Guarino, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s request to be granted the expatriation allowance.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of 29 April 2011;










—


Declare, accordingly, that the applicant is entitled to the expatriation allowance provided for in Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations;










—


Order the Commission to pay that allowance with effect from 16 August 2010, the date of the applicant’s entry into service, together with compensatory interest, in respect of each monthly salary, until actual payment.










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case F-77/11: Action brought on 1 August 2011 — ZZ v Council
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EPSO, admission to examinations, assistant, competition (EU), damages








C_2011340EN.01004003.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/40





Action brought on 1 August 2011 — ZZ v Council
(Case F-77/11)
2011/C 340/83
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision, adopted in implementation of the judgment in Case F-53/08, rejecting the applicant's candidature for promotion to grade AST7 under the 2007 promotion exercise, as well as the application for damages which the applicant allegedly suffered.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of 1 October 2010, adopted by the Director General of DG A Personnel and Administration of the Council of the European Union in implementation of the judgment of 5 May 2010 in Case F-53/08, rejecting the applicant's candidature for promotion to grade AST7 under the 2007 promotion exercise;










—


Order the Council to compensate the applicant for the material and non-material damage suffered;










—


Order the Council to pay damages, with default and compensatory interest at 6,75 % for the material and non-material damage suffered;










—


Order the Council to pay the costs.
Case T-426/11: Action brought on 1 August 2011 — Maharishi Foundation v OHIM (MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE)
Date: 2011-08-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, registered trade mark








C_2011282EN.01004601.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/46





Action brought on 1 August 2011 — Maharishi Foundation v OHIM (MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE)
(Case T-426/11)
2011/C 282/84
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 6 April 2011 in case R 1294/2010-2;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE’ for goods and services in classes 16, 35, 41, 44 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 8246704

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 ‘MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE’ 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.