do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Joined Cases C-468/10 and C-469/10: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 November 2011 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Asociación Nacional de Establecimientos Financieros de Crédito (ASNEF) (C-468/10), Federación de Comercio Electrónico y Marketing Directo (FECEMD) (C-469/10) v Administración del Estado (Processing of personal data — Directive 95/46/EC — Article 7(f) — Direct effect)
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data protection, fundamental rights, personal data








C_2012025EN.01001802.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/18






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 November 2011 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Asociación Nacional de Establecimientos Financieros de Crédito (ASNEF) (C-468/10), Federación de Comercio Electrónico y Marketing Directo (FECEMD) (C-469/10) v Administración del Estado
(Joined Cases C-468/10 and C-469/10) (1)

(Processing of personal data - Directive 95/46/EC - Article 7(f) - Direct effect)
(2012/C 25/30)
Language of the cases: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Asociación Nacional de Establecimientos Financieros de Crédito (ASNEF) (C-468/10), Federación de Comercio Electrónico y Marketing Directo (FECEMD) (C-469/10)

Defendant: Administración del Estado

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Supremo — Interpretation of Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31) — Processing of data by controllers and communication to the addressees to satisfy their respective legitimate interests — Additional requirements — Direct effect of the provisions of a directive

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data must be interpreted as precluding national rules which, in the absence of the data subject’s consent, and in order to allow such processing of that data subject’s personal data as is necessary to pursue a legitimate interest of the data controller or of the third party or parties to whom those data are disclosed, require not only that the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject be respected, but also that the data should appear in public sources, thereby excluding, in a categorical and generalised way, any processing of data not appearing in such sources.










2.


Article 7(f) of Directive 95/46 has direct effect.






(1)  OJ C 346, 18.12.2010.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6436 — Volkswagen Financial Services/D'Ieteren/Volkswagen D'Ieteren Finance JV) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2011344EN.01001301.xml










24.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 344/13





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6436 — Volkswagen Financial Services/D'Ieteren/Volkswagen D'Ieteren Finance JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 344/10






1.


On 16 November 2011, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Volkswagen Financial Services AG (‘VWFS’, Germany) and SA D'Ieteren N.V. (‘D'Ieteren’, Belgium), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Volkswagen D’Ieteren Finance SA (‘VDFin’, Belgium) by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for VWFS: coordination of financial services activities of Volkswagen AG worldwide and provision of financial services relating to the distribution and financing of motor vehicles of Volkswagen group brands,










—


for D'Ieteren: distribution of Volkswagen, Audi, Skoda, Seat, Porsche, Bentley, Lamborghini, Bugatti and Yamaha vehicles, supply of spare parts and provision of after-sales services for the same brands in Belgium; sale of used vehicles, provision of long-term rental services, financial leasing services and vehicle glass repair and replacement services,










—


for VDFin: operating and financial leasing activities, and retail and dealer finance activities in Belgium, including credit protection insurance.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6436 — Volkswagen Financial Services/D'Ieteren/Volkswagen D'Ieteren Finance JV, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Case C-582/11 P: Appeal brought on 24 November 2011 by Rügen Fisch AG against the Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 21 September 2011 in Case T-201/09 Rügen Fisch AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs); other party to the proceedings: Schwaaner Fischwaren GmbH
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, consumer protection, preserved product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012025EN.01003801.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/38






Appeal brought on 24 November 2011 by Rügen Fisch AG against the Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 21 September 2011 in Case T-201/09 Rügen Fisch AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs); other party to the proceedings: Schwaaner Fischwaren GmbH
(Case C-582/11 P)
(2012/C 25/73)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Rügen Fisch AG (represented by: O. Spuhler and M. Geitz, Rechtanwälte)
Other parties to the proceedings:






—


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










—


Schwaaner Fischwaren GmbH





Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 21 September 2011 in Case T-201/09 and annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2009 in appeal case R 230/2007-4;










—


in the alternative, set aside the judgment referred to above and refer the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










—


order the respondent to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The appellant basis its appeal on the following grounds:






 


In the judgment under appeal, the General Court wrongly assumed that the registration of the word sign SCOMBER MIX as a Community trade mark was precluded by the absolute ground for refusal in Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1) as a result of the descriptive character of the mark in dispute.










 


The General Court's assumption constitutes an infringement of Article 7(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009. The word sign SCOMBER MIX is not descriptive since, from the point of view of the relevant consumer, it is a purely fanciful name, which is clearly understood to be a trade mark.










 


The goods and services covered by the trade mark application at issue were determined with the average consumer in mind. However, the average consumer is not familiar with the Latin language or the zoological term ‘scomber’. The word sign SCOMBER MIX therefore satisfies the minimum level of distinctiveness required under European Union law for the registration of a Community trade mark.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Information concerning a modification of Annexes to the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United States, designation of origin, revision of an agreement, trade agreement (EU), wine








L_2011308EN.01000101.xml










24.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 308/1







Information concerning a modification of Annexes to the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine

By letter dated 23 September 2011, the Commission has notified the United States a proposal for amendment to the Annexes to the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine (1) in accordance with Article 11(3)(b) of the Agreement (Commission Implementing Decision 2011/751/EU (2)).
The United States have transmitted a written response confirming its agreement with the amended text in accordance with Article 11(5) of the Agreement dated 27 October 2011.
In accordance with Article 11(5) of the Agreement the Parties have also agreed that the date of this amendment taking effect is specified as 1 December 2011.


(1)  
            OJ L 87, 24.3.2006, p. 2.

(2)  See page 36 of this Official Journal.
Case C-379/10: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 November 2011 — European Commission v Italian Republic (Failure to fulfil obligations — General principal of the liability of Member States for infringements of European Union law by one of their courts adjudicating at last instance — Exclusion of any liability on the part of the Member State for an interpretation of the rules of law or an assessment of the facts and evidence carried out by a court adjudicating at last instance — Limitation by the national legislature of the Member State's liability to cases of intentional fault or serious misconduct committed by such a court)
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, infringement of EU law, legal system, liability of the State








C_2012025EN.01001401.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/14






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 November 2011 — European Commission v Italian Republic
(Case C-379/10) (1)

(Failure to fulfil obligations - General principal of the liability of Member States for infringements of European Union law by one of their courts adjudicating at last instance - Exclusion of any liability on the part of the Member State for an interpretation of the rules of law or an assessment of the facts and evidence carried out by a court adjudicating at last instance - Limitation by the national legislature of the Member State's liability to cases of intentional fault or serious misconduct committed by such a court)
(2012/C 25/21)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Pignataro and M. Nolin, acting as Agents

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, Agent and G. De Bellis, avvocato dello Stato)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of the general principle of the liability of Member States for infringement of European Union law by one of their courts adjudicating at last instance — Liability limited to cases of intentional fault or serious misconduct.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that






—


by excluding all liability of the Italian State for damage caused to individuals through an infringement of European Union law on the part of a court adjudicating at last instance when that infringement results from an interpretation of the rules of law or an assessment of the facts and evidence carried out by that court and










—


by limiting that liability to cases of intentional fault or serious misconduct,




pursuant to Article 2(1) and (2) of Law No 117on the reparation of damage caused in the exercise of judicial functions and the civil liability of judges [legge n. 117 (sul) risarcimento dei danni cagionati nell’ esercizio delle funzioni giudiziarie e responsabilità civile dei magistrati], of 13 April 1988 the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the general principal of the liability of Member States for infringements of European Union law by one of their courts adjudicating at last instance;










2.


Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
Case T-603/11: Action brought on 24 November 2011 — Ecologistas en Acción-CODA v Commission
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, ecology movement, environmental protection








C_2012025EN.01006401.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/64






Action brought on 24 November 2011 — Ecologistas en Acción-CODA v Commission
(Case T-603/11)
(2012/C 25/122)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Ecologistas en Acción-CODA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Doreste Hernández, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the rejection decision of the Secretary General of the European Commission denying access to the documents requested by the applicant in proceedings GESTDEM 2011/6, and










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The documents to which the applicant has sought access and which are at issue in these proceedings are the same as those in Case T-341/11 Ecologistas en acción-CODA v Commission.
The pleas in law and the main arguments are the same as those raised in that case, seeking the annulment of the implied rejection decision denying the applicant access to the requested documents.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6425 — Imperial Mobility/Lehnkering) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building materials, chemical industry, economic concentration, inland waterway transport, logistics, merger control








C_2011344EN.01001501.xml










24.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 344/15





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6425 — Imperial Mobility/Lehnkering)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 344/12






1.


On 17 November 2011 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Imperial Mobility International BV (‘Imperial Mobility’, Netherlands), controlled by Imperial Holdings Limited (South Africa), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Lehnkering Holding GmbH (‘Lehnkering’, Germany) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Imperial Mobility: inland waterway transport, transhipment logistics services, warehousing, contract logistics, distribution, freight forwarding, ship clearance and vehicle trade,










—


for Lehnkering: internal waterway, HGV and combined rail transport, supplementary warehousing and distribution services for hazardous chemical goods, and synthesis, formulation and packaging of chemical products.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6425 — Imperial Mobility/Lehnkering, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Case C-585/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Karlsruhe (Germany) lodged on 24 November 2011 — Philipp Seeberger v Studentenwerk Heidelberg
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European citizenship, education grant, free movement of persons, student mobility








C_2012049EN.01001501.xml










18.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 49/15





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Karlsruhe (Germany) lodged on 24 November 2011 — Philipp Seeberger v Studentenwerk Heidelberg
(Case C-585/11)
2012/C 49/24
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Karlsruhe

Parties to the main proceedings


Claimant: Philipp Seeberger

Defendant: Studentenwerk Heidelberg

Question referred

Does European Union law preclude national legislation which denies an education or training grant for studies in another Member State solely on the ground that the student, who has exercised the right to freedom of movement, has not, at the commencement of the studies, had his permanent residence in his Member State of origin for at least three years? (1)



(1)  Interpretation of Articles 20 and 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) — Citizenship of the Union and free movement.
Case F-124/11: Action brought on 24 November 2011 — ZZ v FRONTEX
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, contract, work contract








C_2012025EN.01007203.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/72






Action brought on 24 November 2011 — ZZ v FRONTEX
(Case F-124/11)
(2012/C 25/141)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. A. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders (FRONTEX)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision to revoke a previous decision concerning the renewal of the contract of employment of the applicant.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the European Union Civil Service Tribunal should:






—


Annul the decision of 28 March 2011 of the Executive Director of FRONTEX;










—


annul the decision of 11 August 2011 of the FRONTEX Executive Director;










—


order FRONTEX to pay the costs.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6437 — Enterprise Holding/Citer) — Candidate case for simplified procedure Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, vehicle rental








C_2011344EN.01001101.xml










24.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 344/11





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6437 — Enterprise Holding/Citer)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 344/08






1.


On 16 November 2011 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Enterprise Holdings, Inc. (‘Enterprise’, United States), belonging to the Crawford group controlled by the Taylor family (United States), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Citer SA (‘Citer SA’, France) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Enterprise: car rental services, leasing, car-sharing services and related activities in the United States, Canada, Asia, Latin America and the EEA,










—


for Citer: car rental services in France and Spain.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6437 — Enterprise Holding/Citer, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).