do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-488/10: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 February 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Alicante — Spain) — Celaya Emparanza y Galdos Internacional SA v Proyectos Integrales de Balizamientos SL (Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Article 19(1) — Community designs — Infringement or threatened infringement — Definition of ‘third parties’ )
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, Spain, designs and models, registered trade mark, registration tax, trade-mark law








C_2012098EN.01000801.xml










31.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/8





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 February 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Alicante — Spain) — Celaya Emparanza y Galdos Internacional SA v Proyectos Integrales de Balizamientos SL
(Case C-488/10) (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Article 19(1) - Community designs - Infringement or threatened infringement - Definition of ‘third parties’)
2012/C 98/09
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Alicante

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Celaya Emparanza y Galdos Internacional SA

Defendant: Proyectos Integrales de Balizamiento SL

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Alicante — Interpretation of Article 19(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 on Community designs (OJ 2002 L 3, p. 1) — Infringement or threatened infringement — Concept of third parties

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 19(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 on Community designs must be interpreted as meaning that, in a dispute relating to infringement of the exclusive right conferred by a registered Community design, the right to prevent use by third parties of the design extends to any third party who uses a design that does not produce on informed users a different overall impression, including the third party holder of a later registered Community design.










2.


The answer to the first question is unconnected with the intention or conduct of the third party.






(1)  OJ C 346, 18.12.2010.
Case C-594/10: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 February 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — T.G. van Laarhoven v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Sixth VAT Directive — Right to deduct input tax — Limitation — Use of goods forming part of the assets of a business for the private use of the taxable person — Fiscal treatment of private use of goods that are assets of the business)
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, motor vehicle, tax exemption








C_2012098EN.01000802.xml










31.3.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/8





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 February 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — T.G. van Laarhoven v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-594/10) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Right to deduct input tax - Limitation - Use of goods forming part of the assets of a business for the private use of the taxable person - Fiscal treatment of private use of goods that are assets of the business)
2012/C 98/10
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: T.G. van Laarhoven

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpretation of Article 17(6) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC 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) — Deduction of input tax — Exclusion of the right to deduct — National rules limiting deduction of VAT for vehicles used by a businessman for both private and professional purposes

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(2)(a) of the 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, as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, read together with Article 11A(1)(c) of the same directive, must be interpreted as precluding national fiscal legislation which initially authorises a taxable person whose passenger vehicles are used for both business and private purposes to deduct input value added tax immediately and in full, but which subsequently provides, as regards private use of those vehicles, for annual taxation based — for determining the taxable amount of value added tax owed in a given financial year — on a flat-rate method of calculating expenses relating to such use which does not take account on a proportional basis of the actual extent of that private use.


(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.
Case T-75/12: Action brought on 16 February 2012 — Nu Air Polska v Commission
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: anti-dumping duty, customs drawback, export price, infringement of EU law








C_2012118EN.01002802.xml










21.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 118/28





Action brought on 16 February 2012 — Nu Air Polska v Commission
(Case T-75/12)
2012/C 118/48
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nu Air Polska sp. z o.o. (Warszawa, Poland) (represented by: R. MacLean, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Declare the application admissible;










—


Partially annul Article 1 of Commission Decision K(2011) 8826, Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2011) 8803 and Article 1 of Commission Decision K(2011) 8801, all three decisions being dated 6 December 2011, insofar as they only grant a partial refund of the anti-dumping duties paid by the applicant and unlawfully retain additional amounts of refunds of anti-dumping duties legitimately due to the applicant;










—


Order maintenance in force of the contested decisions until the European Commission has adopted measures necessary to comply with any judgment of the Court; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the legal costs and expenses of the procedure.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed a manifest error of assessment in applying an appropriate and reasonable unrelated EU importer profit margin, thereby failing to establish a reliable export price for the purpose of calculating the correct anti-dumping refund amount leading to infringements of Articles 2(9) and 18(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009. (1)











2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed a manifest error of assessment by deducting anti-dumping duties as a cost in the calculation of the export price thereby failing to establish a reliable dumping margin for the purpose of calculating the correct anti-dumping refund amount and in doing so violated Articles 2(9), 2(11) and 11(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to inform it of the necessary requirements for satisfying Article 11(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 in a prompt and adequate manner thereby committing violations of the rights of defence enshrined in EU general law as well as the principle of sound administration also established in EU general law and also Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) 1225/2009 on Protection Against Dumped Imports From Countries not Members of the European Community, OJ 2009 L 343, p. 51.
Case C-210/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 25 April 2014  — Criminal proceedings against Daniela Tomassi
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, award of contract, game of chance, invitation to tender, judgment of the Court (EU)








C_2014292EN.01001002.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 25 April 2014 — Criminal proceedings against Daniela Tomassi
(Case C-210/14)
2014/C 292/13
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Party to the main proceedings

Daniela Tomassi

Questions referred







1.


Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU, as also construed in the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 16 February 2012 in Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10, to be interpreted as precluding a call for tenders for the award of licences with a period of validity shorter than that of licences awarded in the past, where that tendering procedure has been launched in order to remedy the consequences of the unlawful exclusion of a certain number of operators from earlier tendering procedures?










2.


Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU, as also construed in the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 16 February 2012 in Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10, to be interpreted as precluding the possibility that sufficient justification for the shorter period of validity of licences offered for tender, as compared with licences awarded in the past, can be found in the requirement for the licensing system to be reorganised through the alignment of licence expiry dates?










3.


Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU, as also construed in the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 16 February 2012 in Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10, to be interpreted as precluding the imposition of an obligation to transfer, free of charge, the use of tangible and intangible assets represented by the betting management and collection network in the event that the activity has ceased owing to the expiry of the licence or as a result of measures disqualifying the licence-holder or withdrawing the licence?
Case T-74/12: Action brought on 16 February 2012 — Mecafer v Commission
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: anti-dumping duty, customs drawback, export price, infringement of EU law








C_2012118EN.01002801.xml










21.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 118/28





Action brought on 16 February 2012 — Mecafer v Commission
(Case T-74/12)
2012/C 118/47
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Mecafer SA (Valence, France) (represented by: R. MacLean, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Declare the application admissible;










—


Partially annul Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2011) 8804 final, of 6 December 2011, insofar as it only grants a partial refund of the anti-dumping duties paid by the applicant and unlawfully retains additional amounts of refunds of anti-dumping duties legitimately due to the applicant;










—


Order maintenance in force of the contested decision until the European Commission has adopted measures necessary to comply with any judgment of the Court; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the legal costs and expenses of the procedure.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed a manifest error of assessment in applying an appropriate and reasonable unrelated EU importer profit margin, thereby failing to establish a reliable export price for the purpose of calculating the correct anti-dumping refund amount leading to infringements of Articles 2(9) and 18(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009. (1)











2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant committed a manifest error of assessment by deducting anti-dumping duties as a cost in the calculation of the export price thereby failing to establish a reliable dumping margin for the purpose of calculating the correct anti-dumping refund amount and in doing so violated Articles 2(9), 2(11) and 11(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to inform it of the necessary requirements for satisfying Article 11(10) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 in a prompt and adequate manner thereby committing violations of the rights of defence enshrined in EU general law as well as the principle of sound administration also established in EU general law and also Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) 1225/2009 on Protection Against Dumped Imports From Countries not Members of the European Community, OJ 2009 L 343, p. 51.
Case T-77/12: Action brought on 16 February 2012 — Wahl v OHIM — Tenacta Group (bellissima)
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, household electrical appliance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012109EN.01003001.xml










14.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/30





Action brought on 16 February 2012 — Wahl v OHIM — Tenacta Group (bellissima)
(Case T-77/12)
2012/C 109/60
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Wahl GmbH (Unterkirnach, Germany) (represented by: T. Kieser, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tenacta Group SpA (Azzano S. Paolo, Italy)

Form of order sought







—


Alter the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 21 November 2011 so as to reject Opposition No B1560781 of 2 November 2009 to Community trade mark No 004534889;










—


in the alternative, alter the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 21 November 2011 so as to reject Opposition No B1560781 of 2 November 2009 to Community trade mark No 004534889 in relation to registration of the trade mark applied for in respect of goods in Class 7;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Wahl GmbH.

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘bellissima’ for goods in Classes 7 and 8 (application No 8406704).

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Tenacta Group SpA.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark ‘bellissima IMETEC’ for goods in Classes 9 and 11 (Community trade mark No 4534889).

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition allowed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, as there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.
Case T-446/09: Order of the General Court of 16 February 2012 — Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra v Commission
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: project evaluation, redemption, working time








C_2012109EN.01003401.xml










14.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/34





Order of the General Court of 16 February 2012 — Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra v Commission
(Case T-446/09) (1)

2012/C 109/67
Language of the case: Portuguese
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 37, 13.2.2010.
Publication of Sogn og Fjordane County Council’s notification of tender procedure pursuant to Article 7.2 of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 1191/69 and (EEC) No 1107/70
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Norway, award of contract, bus, carriage of passengers, inland transport, invitation to tender, public service, rail transport








C_2012044EN.01000501.xml










16.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/5





Publication of Sogn og Fjordane County Council’s notification of tender procedure pursuant to Article 7.2 of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 1191/69 and (EEC) No 1107/70
2012/C 44/04






1.


Name and address of the competent authority:





Sogn og Fjordane County Council




Department of transport services




Askedalen 2




6863 Leikanger




NORWAY














2.


Type of award envisaged:
Open tender procedure










3.


Services and areas potentially covered by the award:
Local/regional passenger services by bus, covering the areas of Stryn, Hornindal, Eid, Vågsøy and Selje municipalities in Sogn og Fjordane county.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6456 — EDF/Kogeneracja)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, merger control








C_2012044EN.01000101.xml










16.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6456 — EDF/Kogeneracja)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 44/01
On 8 February 2012, 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 32012M6456. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin *** European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 February 2012 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin (11343/2010 – C7-0207/2011 – 2010/0093(NLE))
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: EFTA countries, Faroes, Mediterranean third countries, international convention, originating product, ratification of an agreement, stabilisation and association agreement, trade agreement (EU)








CE2013249EN.01012101.xml










30.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 249/121





Thursday 16 February 2012Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin ***
P7_TA(2012)0061
European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 February 2012 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin (11343/2010 – C7-0207/2011 – 2010/0093(NLE))
2013/C 249 E/34
(Consent)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (11343/2010)










—


having regard to the draft regional Convention on pan-European Mediterranean preferential rules of origin (09429/2010),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph, and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0207/2011),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A7-0026/2012),










1.


Consents to conclusion of the Convention;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the parties to the Regional Convention on Pan-Euro Mediterranean Preferential Rules of Origin and the Presidents of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly.
Case T-656/11 R: Order of the Judge of the General Court hearing applications for interim measures of 16 February 2012 — Morison Menon Chartered Accountants and Others v Council (Interim relief — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation — Freezing of funds and economic resources — Application for suspension of operation — No urgency)
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Iran, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, ownership








C_2012109EN.01001303.xml










14.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/13





Order of the Judge of the General Court hearing applications for interim measures of 16 February 2012 — Morison Menon Chartered Accountants and Others v Council
(Case T-656/11 R)
(Interim relief - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds and economic resources - Application for suspension of operation - No urgency)
2012/C 109/31
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Morison Menon Chartered Accountants (Dubai, United Arab Emirates); Morison Menon Chartered Accountants — Dubai Office (Dubai); and Morison Menon Chartered Accountants — Sharjah Office (Sharjah, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: H. Viaene, T. Ruys and D. Gillet, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.-M. Joséphidès and S. Kyriakopoulou, Agents)

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of, first, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2001 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 11) and, second, Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 71), in so far as they add to the list of persons and entities whose funds and economic resources are to be frozen the entity known as ‘Morison Menon Chartered Accountants’.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2012-02-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2012044EN.01000201.xml










16.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

15 February 2012
2012/C 44/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3092




JPY


Japanese yen


102,73




DKK


Danish krone


7,4324




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83480




SEK


Swedish krona


8,7861




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2073




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,5285




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,170




HUF


Hungarian forint


289,63




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,6987




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1875




RON


Romanian leu


4,3470




TRY


Turkish lira


2,3101




AUD


Australian dollar


1,2195




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3053




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,1514




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5626




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6513




KRW


South Korean won


1 470,35




ZAR


South African rand


10,1010




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2412




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5830




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 779,18




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9756




PHP


Philippine peso


55,931




RUB


Russian rouble


39,3175




THB


Thai baht


40,297




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2475




MXN


Mexican peso


16,6897




INR


Indian rupee


64,6420






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.