do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-90/12: Action brought on 27 February 2012 — Elegant Target Development and Others v Council
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Iran, economic sanctions, international sanctions, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2012118EN.01003202.xml










21.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 118/32





Action brought on 27 February 2012 — Elegant Target Development and Others v Council
(Case T-90/12)
2012/C 118/54
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Elegant Target Development Ltd (Hong Kong, China); Eternal Expert Ltd (Hong Kong); Giant King Ltd (Hong Kong); Golden Charter Development Ltd (Hong Kong); Golden Summit Investments Ltd (Hong Kong); Golden Wagon Development Ltd (Hong Kong); Grand Trinity Ltd (Hong Kong); Great Equity Investments Ltd (Hong Kong); Great Prospect International Ltd (Hong Kong); Harvest Supreme Ltd (Hong Kong); Key Charter Development Ltd (Hong Kong); King Prosper Investments Ltd (Hong Kong); Master Supreme International Ltd (Hong Kong); Metro Supreme International Ltd (Hong Kong); Modern Elegant Development Ltd (Hong Kong); Prosper Metro Investments Ltd (Hong Kong); Silver Universe International Ltd (Hong Kong); and Sparkle Brilliant Development Ltd (Hong Kong) (represented by: F. Randolph, M. Lester, Barristers, and M. Taher, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought







—


Annul Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP (1) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 (2), in so far as the names of the applicants were added to the list of persons and entities to which restrictive measures apply;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to give adequate or sufficient reasons for the inclusion of the names of the applicants in the list of persons and entities to which restrictive measures apply.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to fulfil the criteria for listing, and/or committed a manifest error of assessment in determining that those criteria were satisfied in relation to the applicants and/or included the applicants without an adequate legal basis for doing so.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to safeguard the applicants’ rights of defence and right to effective judicial review.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant infringed, without justification or proportion, the applicants’ fundamental rights, including their right to protection of their property, business, and reputation.






(1)  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)

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 11)
Case T-110/12: Action brought on 27 February 2012 — Iranian Offshore Engineering & Construction v Council
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Iran, economic sanctions, equal treatment, international sanctions, ownership, right to justice








C_2012126EN.01002302.xml










28.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 126/23





Action brought on 27 February 2012 — Iranian Offshore Engineering & Construction v Council
(Case T-110/12)
2012/C 126/45
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Iranian Offshore Engineering & Construction Co. (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: J. Viñals Camallonga, L. Barriola Urruticoechea and J. Iriarte Ángel, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Article 1 of Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP in so far as it concerns it and remove its name from the annex thereto;










—


annul Article 1 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 in so far as it concerns it and remove its name from the annex thereto;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present proceedings have been brought against Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran, in so far as the applicant's name has been added to the list of addressees of the measures laid down therein.
In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law: failure to comply with the duty to state reasons, since the contested acts contain erroneous grounds which are unfounded in respect of the applicant.










2.


Second plea in law: infringement of the right to effective judicial protection in relation to the grounds on which the acts are based, since the duty to state reasons was not complied with.










3.


Third plea in law: infringement of the right to property, since that right was restricted without valid justification.










4.


Fourth plea in law: infringement of the principle of equal treatment, as the applicant was treated in the same way as the undertakings which actually participated in Iran's nuclear proliferation, which unjustly relegates it to an inferior competitive position compared with the other national and foreign entities which compete with it on various markets.










5.


Fifth plea in law: misuse of powers, since objective, precise and consistent evidence exists to show that, in adopting the fund-freezing measure, aims have been pursued which are different from those claimed by the Council.
Council Implementing Decision 2012/124/CFSP of 27 February 2012 implementing Decision 2011/101/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Zimbabwe, economic sanctions, international sanctions, removal








L_2012054EN.01002001.xml










28.2.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 54/20








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION 2012/124/CFSP
of 27 February 2012
         
implementing Decision 2011/101/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe


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 2011/101/CFSP (1), and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


On 15 February 2011, the Council adopted Decision 2011/101/CFSP.












(2)


The information relating to one person on the list in Annex I to Decision 2011/101/CFSP should be updated,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The Annex I to Decision 2011/101/CFSP shall be amended as set out in the Annex to this Decision.


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




Done at Brussels, 27 February 2012.


For the Council


The President

C. ASHTON
            





(1)  
            OJ L 42, 16.2.2011, p. 6.




ANNEX
The entry for Cephas George Msipa shall be replaced by the entry set out below:









 


Name (and any aliases)


Identifying information


Grounds for designation




‘60.


Msipa, Cephas George


Former Provincial Governor: Midlands, born 7.7.1931.
Passport ZD001500
ID 63-358147A67


Former Provincial Governor associated with the ZANU-PF faction of the Government.’
Case C-101/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart (Germany) lodged on 27 February 2012 — Herbert Schaible v Land Baden-Württemberg
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural holding, data recording, electronic document management, interpretation of the law, traceability








C_2012133EN.01001902.xml










5.5.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 133/19





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart (Germany) lodged on 27 February 2012 — Herbert Schaible v Land Baden-Württemberg
(Case C-101/12)
2012/C 133/35
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Stuttgart

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Herbert Schaible

Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Questions referred

The questions whether






(a)


the claimant’s obligation to identify individual animals under Articles 3(1) and 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 21/2004, (1)











(b)


the claimant’s obligation of electronic identification of individual animals under the first subparagraph of Article 9(3) of Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1560/2007, (2) and










(c)


the claimant’s obligation to keep holding register C in accordance with Article 5(1) in conjunction with point B(2) of the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 21/2004




are compatible with higher-ranking European Union law and therefore valid are referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 2003 establishing a system for the identification and registration of ovine and caprine animals and amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Directives 92/102/EEC and 64/432/EEC (OJ 2004 L 5, p. 8).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1560/2007 of 17 December 2007 amending Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 as regards the date of introduction of electronic identification for ovine and caprine animals (OJ 2007 L 340, p. 25).
Case T-218/11 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 27 February 2012 — Dagher v Council (Interim measures — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted having regard to the situation in Côte d’Ivoire — Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned — Application for interim measures — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Côte d'Ivoire, arms control, economic sanctions, import restriction, precious stones








C_2012109EN.01001203.xml










14.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 109/12





Order of the President of the General Court of 27 February 2012 — Dagher v Council
(Case T-218/11 R)
(Interim measures - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted having regard to the situation in Côte d’Ivoire - Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned - Application for interim measures - No need to adjudicate)
2012/C 109/28
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Habib Roland Dagher (Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire) (represented by: J.-Y. Dupeux and F. Dressen, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and E. Dumitriu-Segnana, acting as Agents)

Re:

Firstly, application for an order that the Council and the Italian Republic issue a visa to the applicant; secondly, application for suspension of operation of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 85/2011 of 31 January 2011, implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 of 12 April 2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d'Ivoire (OJ 2005 L 28, p. 32) and Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP of 29 October 2010 renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2010 L 28, p. 60); and, thirdly, a claim for damages in compensation for the loss allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate in the application for interim measures.










2.


The Council of the European Union shall pay the costs.
Case C-102/12 P: Appeal brought on 27 February 2012 by Stefan Städter against the order of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 16 December 2011 in Case T-532/11 Stefan Städter v European Central Bank
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: financial market, legal expenses, public borrowing








C_2012399EN.01000802.xml










22.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/8





Appeal brought on 27 February 2012 by Stefan Städter against the order of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 16 December 2011 in Case T-532/11 Stefan Städter v European Central Bank
(Case C-102/12 P)
2012/C 399/13
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Stefan Städter (represented by: M.C. Kerber, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank
By its order of 15 November 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to bear his own costs.
Case T-183/11: Order of the General Court of 27 February 2012 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Jacinto (My Little Bear) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Expiry of the earlier national mark — Action devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012126EN.01001801.xml










28.4.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 126/18





Order of the General Court of 27 February 2012 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Jacinto (My Little Bear)
(Case T-183/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Expiry of the earlier national mark - Action devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
2012/C 126/36
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Manuel Jacinto, Lda (S. Paio de Oleiros, Portugal)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 January 2011 (Case R 494/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Manuel Jacinto, Lda, and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


Each party shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
Case F-24/12: Action brought on 27 February 2012 — ZZ v Parliament
Date: 2012-02-27
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, demotion, indemnification, job mobility, psychological harassment








C_2012138EN.01003601.xml










12.5.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/36






Action brought on 27 February 2012 — ZZ v Parliament
(Case F-24/12)
(2012/C 138/83)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Tymen and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision adopted by the President of the European Parliament reassigning the applicant within the same Directorate-General of the Parliament from the post of Head of Unit to a post of Advisor to the Director of a Directorate and the claim for compensation for psychological harassment.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the President of the European Parliament of 16 January 2012 which terminated, with retroactive effect from 1 January 2012, the applicant’s duties as Head of Unit for Equality and Diversity in DG Personnel and which transferred him, from that date, to Directorate D of that DG as Advisor, and at the same time withdrew the benefit of the allowance for Heads of Unit;










—


Grant the applicant damages in compensation for harm suffered for an amount assessed on an equitable basis at EUR 50 000;










—


Order the Parliament to pay the costs.