do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-484/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from Tribunalul Argeș (Romania) lodged on 20 September 2011 — Mariana Budan v Romanian State — Ministerul Finanțelor Publice represented by the Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Argeș
Date: 2011-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Communism, damages, help for victims, indemnification








C_2011347EN.01001501.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/15





Reference for a preliminary ruling from Tribunalul Argeș (Romania) lodged on 20 September 2011 — Mariana Budan v Romanian State — Ministerul Finanțelor Publice represented by the Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice Argeș
(Case C-484/11)
2011/C 347/22
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Argeș

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Mariana Budan

Defendant: Romanian State — Ministerul Finanțelor Publice (Ministry for Public Finance) represented by the Direcția Generală a Finanțelor Publice (Directorate General for Public Finance), Argeș

Intervener: Iulian-Nicolae Cujbescu

Question referred

In the interpretation given by the Court of Justice of the European Union of the fundamental principles laid down by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and by the Treaties of the European Union — and in the absence of any domestic legislation (as result of the declaration that Article 5 of Law No 221/[2009] is unconstitutional) — are the applicant, Mariana Budan, … and the intervener, Iulian-Nicolae Cujbescu … entitled to compensation for non-material damage as victims of the Communist regime and now citizens of the European Union?
Case T-298/09: Judgment of the General Court (SecondChamber) of 20 September 2011 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission (Public service contracts — Community tendering procedure — Supply of external services for educational programmes — Award of the contract to several tenderers — Tenderer’s ranking — Action for annulment — Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based — Grounds for exclusion from the contract award procedure — Article 93(1)(f) of the Financial Regulation — Tender validity period — Non-contractual liability)
Date: 2011-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: equal treatment, invitation to tender, services contract, teaching curriculum








C_2011319EN.01001602.xml










29.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/16





Judgment of the General Court (SecondChamber) of 20 September 2011 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission
(Case T-298/09) (1)

(Public service contracts - Community tendering procedure - Supply of external services for educational programmes - Award of the contract to several tenderers - Tenderer’s ranking - Action for annulment - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based - Grounds for exclusion from the contract award procedure - Article 93(1)(f) of the Financial Regulation - Tender validity period - Non-contractual liability)
2011/C 319/31
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis and M. Dermitzakis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Bambara and E. Manhaeve, Agents, assisted by P. Wytinck, lawyer)

Re:

APPLICATION, first, for annulment of two Commission decisions, communicated in two separate letters of 12 May 2009 ranking the applicant, for its tenders in response to the open call for tenders EAC/01/2008 for external service provision for educational programmes (ESP-ISEP) (OJ 2008/S 158-212752), for Lot No 1 (IS (information system) Development and Maintenance) and for Lot No 2 (IS (information system) Studies, Testing, Training and Support), as second contractor for each of those lots and, secondly, for damages

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 233, 26.9.2009.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6301 — Eurazeo/Moncler)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-09-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, textile industry








C_2011275EN.01000302.xml










20.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 275/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6301 — Eurazeo/Moncler)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 275/06
On 13 September 2011, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6301. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6245 — Liberty Mutual Group/The Irish General Business of Quinn Insurance Limited)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-09-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, insurance company, merger control








C_2011275EN.01000301.xml










20.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 275/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6245 — Liberty Mutual Group/The Irish General Business of Quinn Insurance Limited)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 275/05
On 5 September 2011, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32011M6245. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-232/10: Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2011 — Couture Tech v OHIM (Representation of the Soviet coat of arms) (Community trade mark — Application for a Community figurative mark representing the Soviet coat of arms — Absolute ground for refusal — Whether contrary to public policy or accepted principles of morality — Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, communications industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011319EN.01001802.xml










29.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/18





Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2011 — Couture Tech v OHIM (Representation of the Soviet coat of arms)
(Case T-232/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing the Soviet coat of arms - Absolute ground for refusal - Whether contrary to public policy or accepted principles of morality - Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 319/37
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Couture Tech Ltd (Tortola, British Virgin Islands) (represented by: B. Whyatt, Barrister)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 March 2010 (Case R 1509/2008-2) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing the Soviet coat of arms as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Couture Tech Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 195, 17.7.2010.
Case T-120/08: Judgment of the General Court of (Second Chamber) of 20 September 2011 — Arch Chemicals and Others v Commission (Action for annulment — Health policy — Marketing of biocidal products — Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 — Not individually concerned — Inadmissibility — Default procedure)
Date: 2011-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: chemical product, health control, marketing








C_2011319EN.01001202.xml










29.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 319/12





Judgment of the General Court of (Second Chamber) of 20 September 2011 — Arch Chemicals and Others v Commission
(Case T-120/08) (1)

(Action for annulment - Health policy - Marketing of biocidal products - Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 - Not individually concerned - Inadmissibility - Default procedure)
2011/C 319/22
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Arch Chemicals, Inc. (Norwalk, Connecticut, United States); Arch Timber Protection Ltd (Castleford, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom); Rhodia UK Ltd (Watford, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom); Sumitomo Chemical (UK) plc (London, United Kingdom); Troy Chemical Co. BV (Vlaardingen, Netherlands) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem and C. Mereu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and E. Kružíková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicants: European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC), (Brussels, Belgium) (represented: initially by Y. van Gerven and V. Terrien, and subsequently by Y. van Gerven, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of Article 3(2), Article 4, Article 7(3), the second subparagraph of Article 14(2), Article 15(3), Article 17 of and Annex II to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 of 4 December 2007 on the second phase of the 10-year work programme referred to in Article 16(2) of Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market (OJ 2007, L 325, p. 3)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene made by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders Arch Chemicals, Inc., Arch Timber Protection Ltd, Rhodia UK Ltd, Sumitomo Chemical (UK) plc and Troy Chemical Co. BV to bear their own costs;










4.


Orders the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 128, 24.5.2008.