do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-169/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 10 April 2012 — TNT Express Worldwide (Poland) Sp. z o.o. v Minister Finansów
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, carriage of goods, interpretation of the law, invoicing, provision of services, tax collection








C_2012209EN.01000201.xml










14.7.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/2





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 10 April 2012 — TNT Express Worldwide (Poland) Sp. z o.o. v Minister Finansów
(Case C-169/12)
2012/C 209/02
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: TNT Express Worldwide (Poland) Sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Minister Finansów

Questions referred







1.


Are the provisions of Article 66(a), (b) and (c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1, as amended) (‘Directive 2006/112’) to be interpreted as meaning that where a taxable person issues an invoice documenting the supply of a service covered by the power conferred on Member States by that article (derogation from Articles 63, 64 and 65 of Directive 2006/112), it is possible to determine the chargeability of the tax (liability to pay the tax) on the basis of Article 66(b) of Directive 2006/112 as arising on the date of payment, but no later than 30 days from the date on which the service is supplied?










2.


Are the provisions of Article 66(a) and (b) of Directive 2006/112 to be interpreted as precluding the Polish national provisions in Article 19(13)(2)(a) and (b) of the Ustawa o podatku od towarów i usług (Law on the tax on goods and services) of 11 March 2004 (Dziennik Ustaw No 54, item 535, as amended) under which the time when the liability to pay the tax arises (the event on whose occurrence the tax becomes chargeable in respect of certain transactions) occurs in respect of transport and shipping services on receipt of payment in full or in part, but no later than 30 days from the date on which those services are supplied, even where an invoice laying down a later deadline for payment is issued and presented to the purchaser no later than seven days after the service is supplied and the purchaser of the service has the right to deduct input tax during the period in which he received the invoice, irrespective of whether or not he has paid for the service?
Case T-166/12: Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Bolívar Cerezo v OHIM — Renovalia Energy (RENOVALIA)
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, renewable energy, trade-mark law








C_2012194EN.01002202.xml










30.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/22





Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Bolívar Cerezo v OHIM — Renovalia Energy (RENOVALIA)
(Case T-166/12)
2012/C 194/38
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Juan Bolívar Cerezo (Granada, Spain) (represented by: I.M. Barroso Sánchez-Lafuente, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Renovalia Energy, SA (Villarobledo, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of 26 January 2012 of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) in Case R 663/2011-1, resulting in the registration of Community trade mark No 8 631 814‘RENOVALIA’ for ‘Insurance; financial affairs; monetary affairs; real estate affairs’ in Class 36;










—


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: Word mark ‘RENOVALIA’ for goods and services in Classes 11, 25, 35, 36, 37 and 41 — application for Community trade mark No 8 631 814

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Renovalia Energy, SA

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish word marks ‘RENOVA ENERGY’ and ‘RENOVAENERGY’ and trade name ‘RENOVALIA’ for services in Class 36

Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: There is a likelihood of confusion between the applicant’s priority Spanish mark No 2 715 975‘RENOVALIA’ and the opposing Spanish marks. An action for annulment is to be brought before the competent Spanish national court against the opposing Spanish marks, as a result of which those marks will no longer be able to be relied on to oppose the registration of the Community trade mark applied for
Case C-83/12 PPU: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 April 2012 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against Minh Khoa Vo (Area of freedom, security and justice — Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 — Community Code on Visas — Articles 21 and 34 — National legislation — Third country nationals brought illegally into the territory of a Member State — Visas obtained by fraud — Criminal penalties imposed on the human smuggler)
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU visa policy, Germany, fraud, illegal migration








C_2012174EN.01001401.xml










16.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 174/14





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 April 2012 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against Minh Khoa Vo
(Case C-83/12 PPU) (1)

(Area of freedom, security and justice - Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 - Community Code on Visas - Articles 21 and 34 - National legislation - Third country nationals brought illegally into the territory of a Member State - Visas obtained by fraud - Criminal penalties imposed on the human smuggler)
2012/C 174/20
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Party in the main proceedings

Minh Khoa Vo

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesgerichtshof — Interpretation of Articles 21 and 34 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (OJ 2009 L 243, p. 1) — National legislation imposing criminal penalties on persons who smuggle foreign nationals into national territory — Applicability of penalties when the foreign nationals concerned are in possession of a visa obtained by false pretences from a competent authority of another Member State but which has not yet been annulled pursuant to that regulation

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 21 and 34 of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code) are to be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national provisions under which assisting illegal immigration constitutes an offence subject to criminal penalties in cases where the persons smuggled, third country nationals, hold visas which they obtained fraudulently by deceiving the competent authorities of the Member State of issue as to the true purpose of their journey, without prior annulment of those visas.


(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.
Case F-45/12: Action brought on 10th April 2012 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EU office or agency, Moldova, servant (EU), work contract








C_2012200EN.01002102.xml










7.7.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/21





Action brought on 10th April 2012 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-45/12)
2012/C 200/44
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: N. Visan, Lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the Commission's decision not to renew the Staff contract of the Applicant.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the Decision of 27-28.07.2011 of the EU Delegation to the Republic of Moldova not to renew the employment contract of the applicant and, annul European Commission DG.HR.D.2's Decision dated 16.01.2011 to applicant's Complaint no. Rl687/11 filed under article 90(2).










—


Order the European Commission to reintegrate the Applicant in another EU Delegation so that the Applicant maintains the rights obtained during the performance of the employment contract from 2008 to 2011 in the EU Delegation to Moldova [probation period passed; salary step appraisal points accumulated], and ensure that the new post will be compatible with the EPSO/CAST contest profile that the Applicant has passed in 2007.










—


Order the Defendant to make a Public acknowledgement of the error made by the EU Delegation to the Republic of Moldova at the moment they offered the ‘Charge de Mission Adjoint’ post to the Applicant — an error that has led to the impossibility of ensuring article 4-paragraph 2/renewal clause since day-1 of contract, to the under-positioning of the Applicant and the assignment of tasks inferior to the Job of the Applicant's Description from 2008 until 2011;










—


Order the Defendant to pay of damages for the moral prejudice caused from 2008 until 2011 by the irregularities mentioned above. Damages are to be calculated on a monthly basis as the salary difference between the Applicant and the Local Agent for the entire 2008-2011 period -the reasoning being that the Delegation (a) had willingly assigned to the Applicant identical tasks as given to the Local Agent despite of very different Job Descriptions, (b) had done its utmost to keep the Applicant from performing tasks/undertaking the correct position according to the Job Description, (c) constantly denied that Applicant's post involved deputing to the Head of the FCA.










—


Order the Defendant to pay the damages for the period ‘10.11.2011 — until the reintegration into another EU Delegation — EU Institution’ for the material and non-material losses suffered by the Applicant following the Decision of 27-28.07.2011 of the EU Delegation to the Republic of Moldova not to renew the Applicant's agent contract category 3a). Damages are to be calculated on the basis of the monthly salary of the Applicant for the entire period 10.11.2011- until reintegration into work.










—


Order the European Commission to pay for all expenses generated with this trial.
Case T-169/12: Action brought on 10 April 2012 — CHEMK and KF v Council
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Russia, anti-dumping duty, export price, ferro-alloy, import (EU), originating product, semi-metal








C_2012165EN.01003401.xml










9.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/34





Action brought on 10 April 2012 — CHEMK and KF v Council
(Case T-169/12)
2012/C 165/56
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Chelyabinsk electrometallurgical integrated plant OAO (CHEMK) (Chelyabinsk, Russia); and Kuzneckie ferrosplavy OAO (KF) (Novokuznetsk, Russia) (represented by: B. Evtimov, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought







—


Annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 60/2012 of 16 January 2012 terminating the partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of ferro-silicon originating, inter alia, in Russia (OJ L 22, p. 1), in so far as it affects the applicants; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the cost incurred by the present proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging






—


that the Institutions breached Article 11(9) in connection with Article 2(12) of ‘the basic Regulation’ (1) by failing to establish the amount of the dumping margin of the applicants. In addition, or in the alternative, the Institutions erred in law and exceeded their margin of discretion in their powers of prospective assessment under Article 11(3) by allowing the findings on lasting nature of changed circumstances to subsume the dumping findings, vitiating the findings on the changed dumping margin in the interim review and extending the scope of analysis of continuation of dumping so as to cover/affect the findings on dumping margin. Lastly, the Institutions infringed the applicants’ rights of defence with respect to dumping by failing to disclose their final calculation of dumping to the applicants.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging






—


that the Institutions made a manifest error of assessment in concluding that an adjustment for SG&A costs and profit of RFAI had to be made to the applicants’ export price and in the related finding that the applicants and RFAI did not constitute a single economic entity.














3.


Third plea in law, alleging






—


that the Institutions breached Article 11(3), third subparagraph and/or made manifest errors of assessment in concluding that there was no lasting change of circumstances with respect to the reduced dumping margin of the applicants.










(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (‘the basic Regulation’) (OJ L 343, p. 51)
Case T-170/12: Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Beyond Retro v OHIM — S&K Garments (BEYOND VINTAGE)
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2012194EN.01002301.xml










30.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/23





Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Beyond Retro v OHIM — S&K Garments (BEYOND VINTAGE)
(Case T-170/12)
2012/C 194/39
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Beyond Retro Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: S&K Garments, Inc. (New York, United States)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 31 January 2012 joined cases R 493/2011-4 and R 548/2011-4; and










—


Order the Office and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear their own costs and pay those of the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: International Registration of the word mark ‘BEYOND VINTAGE’, for goods and services in classes 14, 18 and 25 — Community trade mark application No W 994046

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 5629035 of the word mark ‘BEYOND RETRO’, for goods and services in classes 25 AND 35

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the applicant’s appeal in case R 548/2011-4 and annulled the decision of the opposition division in case R 493/2011-4

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-160/12: Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Adler Modemärkte v OHIM — Blufin (MARINE BLEU)
Date: 2012-04-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012184EN.01001601.xml










23.6.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/16





Action brought on 10 April 2012 — Adler Modemärkte v OHIM — Blufin (MARINE BLEU)
(Case T-160/12)
2012/C 184/29
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Adler Modemärkte AG (Haibach, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Blufin SpA (Carpi, Italy)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 February 2012 in Case R 1955/2010-2;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs, including the costs of the appeal proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘MARINE BLEU’ for goods in Classes 18, 24 and 25 — application No 6 505 952

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Blufin

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the Italian and Community trade mark and the Italian and international trade mark registration ‘BLUMARINE’ for goods in Classes 3, 9, 14, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25 and 27

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was upheld in part, the application was rejected in part and the case was referred back to the Opposition Division in part

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009