do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-31/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Zakopanem (Poland), lodged on 23 January 2012 — Criminal proceedings against Wojciech Ziemski and Andrzej Kozak
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disclosure of information, game of chance, technical rule








C_2012165EN.01000702.xml










9.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/7





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Zakopanem (Poland), lodged on 23 January 2012 — Criminal proceedings against Wojciech Ziemski and Andrzej Kozak
(Case C-31/12)
2012/C 165/12
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy w Zakopanem

Parties to the main proceedings

Wojciech Ziemski, Andrzej Kozak

Question referred

Must Article 1.11 of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services (1) be interpreted as meaning that the technical regulations, the draft of which must be communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 8(1) of that directive, also include a legislative provision which defines the statutory concepts and prohibitions which are described and set out in Article 29 of the Ustawa z dnia 19 listopada 2009 roku o grach hazardowych (Polish Law of 19 November 2009 on games of chance) (Dz. U. No 201, position 1540, as amended)?


(1)  OJ 1998 L 204, p. 37.
Case C-32/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia (Badajoz, Spain) lodged on 23 January 2012 — Soledad Duarte Hueros v Autociba S.A., Automóviles Citroen España S.A.
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, interpretation of the law, reduced price








C_2012098EN.01001702.xml










31.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/17





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia (Badajoz, Spain) lodged on 23 January 2012 — Soledad Duarte Hueros v Autociba S.A., Automóviles Citroen España S.A.
(Case C-32/12)
2012/C 98/28
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia, Badajoz

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Soledad Duarte Hueros

Defendant: Autociba S.A., Automóviles Citroen-2 España S.A.

Question referred

If a consumer, after failing to have the product brought into conformity — because, despite repeated requests, repair has not been carried out — seeks in legal proceedings only rescission of the contract, and such rescission is not available because the lack of conformity is minor, may the court of its own motion grant the consumer an appropriate price reduction?
Case T-33/12: Action brought on 23 January 2012 — Piotrowski v OHIM (MEDIGYM)
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, sport, trade-mark law








C_2012080EN.01002401.xml










17.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/24





Action brought on 23 January 2012 — Piotrowski v OHIM (MEDIGYM)
(Case T-33/12)
2012/C 80/40
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Elke Piotrowski (Viernheim, Germany) (represented by J. Albrecht, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 November 2011 in Case R 734/2011-4;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘MEDIGYM’ for goods in Class 10

Decision of the Examiner: the application was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal’s decision was based on reasons on which the applicant had had no opportunity to present her comments and infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009 as the Community trade mark at issue was refused protection pursuant to Article 154(3) and Article 37(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 even though the mark was not ineligible for registration either under Article 7(1)(b) or Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009
Case T-38/12: Action brought on 23 January 2012 — Pips v OHIM — s.Oliver Bernd Freier (ISABELLA OLIVER)
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, road safety, technology, trade-mark law








C_2012089EN.01002802.xml










24.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 89/28





Action brought on 23 January 2012 — Pips v OHIM — s.Oliver Bernd Freier (ISABELLA OLIVER)
(Case T-38/12)
2012/C 89/47
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Pips BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: J.A.K. van den Berg, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: s.Oliver Bernd Freier GmbH & Co. KG (Rottendorf, Germany)

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 20 October 2011 in case R 2420/2010-1;










—


Allow the Community trade mark application No 7024961 for the word mark ‘ISABELLA OLIVER’, for all the goods and services subject to the proceedings before the First Board of Appeal; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘ISABELLA OLIVER’, for goods and services in classes 3, 4, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 24 and 25 — Community trade mark application No 7024961

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark application No 6819908 of the word mark ‘S.Oliver’, for goods in classes 4, 16, 20, 21 and 24; Community trade mark registration No 4504569 of the figurative mark ‘s.Oliver’, for goods and services in classes 3, 6, 9, 14, 18, 20, 25, 28 and 35; German trade mark registration No 30734710.9 of the word mark ‘S.Oliver’, for goods in classes 10, 12 and 21; Community trade mark registration No 181875 of the word mark ‘S.Oliver’, for goods in classes 3, 6, 9, 14, 18, 20, 25 and 26; International trade mark registration No 959255 of the word mark ‘S.Oliver’, for goods in classes 10, 12 and 21

Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially rejected the CTM application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 76 of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal; (i) made an assessment of the similarity of the marks on the basis of facts/circumstances not provided by the parties, as a consequence of which the conclusion with regard to the similarity of signs is erroneous; and (ii) incorrectly applied the principles formulated by the ECJ in relation to overall assessment of likelihood of confusion.
Case C-30/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov (Slovakia) lodged on 23 January 2012 — Valeria Marcinová v Pohotovosť, s.r.o.
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, deduction at source, interpretation of the law, misuse of a right








C_2012098EN.01001701.xml










31.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/17





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov (Slovakia) lodged on 23 January 2012 — Valeria Marcinová v Pohotovosť, s.r.o.
(Case C-30/12)
2012/C 98/27
Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Okresný súd Prešov

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Valeria Marcinová

Defendant: Pohotovosť, s.r.o.

Question referred

Do Articles 38 and 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in conjunction with Article 169 TFEU preclude the application of national legislation under which, on the basis of an agreement on deductions from salary, such deductions are made from the consumer in the absence of any judicial control of unfair clauses and according to which the consumer has no direct possibility of annulling those deductions?
Case T-607/11 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 23 January 2012 — Henkel and Henkel France v Commission (Application for interim measures — Competition — Commission decision refusing to transmit documents to a national competition authority — Application for interim measures — No interest in bringing proceedings — Disregard of formal requirements — Measures requested not provisional in character — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: competition, provision of documents, rights of the defence








C_2012080EN.01001901.xml










17.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/19





Order of the President of the General Court of 23 January 2012 — Henkel and Henkel France v Commission
(Case T-607/11 R)
(Application for interim measures - Competition - Commission decision refusing to transmit documents to a national competition authority - Application for interim measures - No interest in bringing proceedings - Disregard of formal requirements - Measures requested not provisional in character - Inadmissibility)
2012/C 80/32
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Düsseldorf, Germany); and Henkel France (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: R. Polley, T. Kuhn, F. Brunet and É. Paroche, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan and P.J.O. Van Nuffel, Agents)

Re:

Application for interim measures in relation to the Commission’s decision of 30 September 2011 (Case COMP/39.579 — Consumer detergents — and Case 09/0007 F) dismissing the request of the French competition authority that the Commission transfer to it, in the context of Case 09/0007 F concerning the French detergents sector, a number of documents produced in Case COMP/39.579.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.
Council Decision 2012/34/CFSP of 23 January 2012 appointing the Chairman of the Military Committee of the European Union
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU Military Committee, appointment of members








L_2012019EN.01002101.xml










24.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 19/21








            COUNCIL DECISION 2012/34/CFSP
of 23 January 2012
         
appointing the Chairman of the Military Committee of the European Union


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 240 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2001/79/CFSP setting up the Military Committee of the European Union (1),

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 3(1) of Decision 2001/79/CFSP, the Chairman of the Military Committee of the European Union ("the Military Committee") shall be appointed by the Council on the recommendation of the Military Committee meeting at the level of the Chiefs of Defence. According to Article 3(2) of the said Decision, the term of office of the Chairman of the Military Committee is three years, unless the Council decides otherwise.












(2)


On 8 December 2008, the Council appointed General Håkan SYRÉN as Chairman of the Military Committee for a period of three years as from 6 November 2009 (2).












(3)


At its meeting on 22 November 2011, the Military Committee meeting at the level of the Chiefs of Defence recommended that General Patrick de ROUSIERS be appointed Chairman of the Military Committee,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
General Patrick de ROUSIERS is hereby appointed Chairman of the Military Committee of the European Union for a period of three years as from 6 November 2012.


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




Done at Brussels, 23 January 2012.


For the Council


The President

C. ASHTON
            





(1)  
            OJ L 27, 30.1.2001, p. 4.

(2)  Council Decision 2009/22/EC of 8 December 2008 appointing the Chairman of the Military Committee of the European Union (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 51).
Case F-10/12: Action brought on 23 January 2012 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, indemnification, payment








C_2012065EN.01002901.xml










3.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/29





Action brought on 23 January 2012 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-10/12)
2012/C 65/57
Language of the case: French

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Commission decision refusing to grant daily subsistence allowances to the applicant.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:






—


annul the Commission decision of 24 May 2011 and the explicit decision rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 24 October 2011, and order the Commission to pay the daily subsistence allowance.










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 57/2012 of 23 January 2012 suspending the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2011
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: CCT duties, common organisation of markets, import (EU), import licence, invitation to tender, sugar, tariff reduction








L_2012019EN.01001201.xml










24.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 19/12








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 57/2012
of 23 January 2012
         
suspending the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2011


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 187, in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2011 (2) opened a standing invitation to tender for the 2011/2012 marketing year for imports of sugar of CN code 1701  at a reduced customs duty.












(2)


The availability of supply on the Union sugar market has improved, therefore further reduction of the import duty will not be necessary and the submission of tenders should be suspended.












(3)


In order to give a rapid signal to the market and to ensure efficient management of the measure, this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.













(4)


The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chairman,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
In accordance with Article 2(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2011 the submission of tenders is suspended for the partial invitation to tender ending on 25 January 2012, 1 February 2012 and 15 February 2012.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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, 23 January 2012.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





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

(2)  
            OJ L 318, 1.12.2011, p. 4.
Case T-31/12: Action brought on 23 January 2012 — Région Poitou-Charentes v Commission
Date: 2012-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Atlantic Arc, EU programme, Structural Funds








C_2012109EN.01001602.xml










14.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/16





Action brought on 23 January 2012 — Région Poitou-Charentes v Commission
(Case T-31/12)
2012/C 109/37
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Région Poitou-Charentes (Poitiers, France) (represented by: J. Capiaux, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the European Commission decision of 18 November 2011 refusing to close the Community initiative programme INTERREG III B ‘Atlantic Area’ 2000/2006 (reference CCI No 2001 RG 16 0 PC 006) adopted by the European Commission.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging the unlawfulness of the Commission decision, in so far as the signatory of the measure was not entitled to a delegated right of signature.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging disregard of essential procedural requirements, the Commission not being compliant with the mandatory time-limit imposed by Article 37(1) of Regulation No 1260/1999 (1) for stating its reasons why the applicant's final report was unsatisfactory.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging errors of law:






—


the Commission having alleged that the applicant did not comply with the rules concerning approval of the final report, whereas the rules of the monitoring committee provided for a scheme of implicit approval of that report at the expiry of a six day time-limit; and










—


the Commission having stated that the applicant’s report should have been drafted in English, whereas there is no rule requiring that a report be drafted in a language other than that of the managing authority (in this case French) in order to be valid.














4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging inadequate reasons for the contested decision.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging an abuse of power, the Commission having taken into account a ground which by its nature is extraneous to European interests in order to refuse to close the initiative programme in question.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (OJ 1999 L 161, p. 1).