do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-608/11 P: Order of the Court of 12 July 2012 — Land Wien v European Commission (Appeal — Nuclear energy — Extension of the nuclear power station at Mochovce (Slovak Republic) — Commission decision to take no further action on complaint — Action for annulment — Refusal by the Commission to send the documents requested — Action for failure to act — Minimum requirements laid down in Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Slovakia, access to EU information, nuclear power station








C_2012366EN.01002102.xml










24.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 366/21





Order of the Court of 12 July 2012 — Land Wien v European Commission
(Case C-608/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Nuclear energy - Extension of the nuclear power station at Mochovce (Slovak Republic) - Commission decision to take no further action on complaint - Action for annulment - Refusal by the Commission to send the documents requested - Action for failure to act - Minimum requirements laid down in Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court - Inadmissibility)
2012/C 366/37
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Land Wien (represented by: W.-G. Schärf, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Patakia, P. Oliver and G. Wilms, agents)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 20 September 2011 in Case T-267/10 Land Wien v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed the applicant’s action seeking, on the one hand, annulment of the Commission’s decision of 25 March 2010 to take no further action on its complaint regarding the project to extend blocks 3 and 4 of the nuclear power station at Mochovce (Slovak Republic) and, on the other hand, a declaration that the Commission failed to act, within the meaning of Article 265 TFEU, to the extent that not all the documents relating to that project were sent to the applicant, in breach of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43) — Infringement of the right of access to documents, of the fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU and of the Euratom Treaty

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Land Wien is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
Case T-323/11: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Unión de Cervecerías Peruanas Backus y Johnston v OHIM (shape of a bottle) (Community trade marks — Absolute grounds for refusal — Application for a three-dimensional trade mark — Shape of a bottle — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beer, packaging product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012258EN.01001903.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/19





Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Unión de Cervecerías Peruanas Backus y Johnston v OHIM (shape of a bottle)
(Case T-323/11) (1)

(Community trade marks - Absolute grounds for refusal - Application for a three-dimensional trade mark - Shape of a bottle - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2012/C 258/35
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Unión de Cervecerías Peruanas Backus y Johnston SAA (Lima, Peru) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and C. Morán Medina, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 March 2011 (Case R 2238/2010-2) concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting in the shape of a bottle as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Unión de Cervecerías Peruanas Backus y Johnston SAA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 252, 27.8.2011.
Case T-346/09: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Winzer Pharma v OHIM — Alcon (BAÑOFTAL) (Community trade marks — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community trade mark BAÑOFTAL — Earlier national word marks KAN-OPHTAL and PAN-OPHTAL — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, optical industry, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012258EN.01001603.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/16





Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Winzer Pharma v OHIM — Alcon (BAÑOFTAL)
(Case T-346/09) (1)

(Community trade marks - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community trade mark BAÑOFTAL - Earlier national word marks KAN-OPHTAL and PAN-OPHTAL - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2012/C 258/27
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Dr. Robert Winzer Pharma GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: S.Schneller, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Alcon Inc. Hünenberg, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Vidal-Quadras Trais de Bes, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 May 2009 (Case R 795/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Dr. Robert Winzer Pharma GmbH and Alcon Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 28 May 2009 (Case R 795/2008-1);










2.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Dr. Robert Winzer Pharma GmbH.










3.


Orders Alcon Inc. to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 256, 24.10.2009.
Case T-92/12: Order of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Gas v OHIM — Grotto (GAS)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012273EN.01002305.xml










8.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 273/23





Order of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Gas v OHIM — Grotto (GAS)
(Case T-92/12) (1)

2012/C 273/43
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.
Notice of open competitions
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, administrative competition, competition (EU), invitation to tender, translation








C_2012204EN.01004101.xml










12.7.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 204/41





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITIONS
2012/C 204/05
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competitions:






 


EPSO/AD/240/12 — Estonian-language (ET) translators










 


EPSO/AD/241/12 — Irish-language (GA) translators










 


EPSO/AD/242/12 — Latvian-language (LV) translators










 


EPSO/AD/243/12 — Portuguese-language (PT) translators




The competition notice is published in Official Journal C 204 A of 12 July 2012 in Estonian, Irish, Latvian and Portuguese only.
Further details can be found on the EPSO website: http://www.eu-careers.info
Case C-372/11 P: Order of the Court of 12 July 2012 — Power-One Italy SpA v European Commission (Appeal — Non-contractual liability — Project co-funded by the financial instrument ‘LIFE’ — Development of a new system of supplying power for use in mobile telephony ( ‘Pneuma project’ ) — Commission decision to end the project and to recover the advance paid — Compensation for the loss allegedly sustained)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: co-financing, contractual liability, mobile phone, research project








C_2012366EN.01001901.xml










24.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 366/19





Order of the Court of 12 July 2012 — Power-One Italy SpA v European Commission
(Case C-372/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Non-contractual liability - Project co-funded by the financial instrument ‘LIFE’ - Development of a new system of supplying power for use in mobile telephony (‘Pneuma project’) - Commission decision to end the project and to recover the advance paid - Compensation for the loss allegedly sustained)
2012/C 366/31
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Power-One Italy SpA (represented by: R. Giuffrida and A. Giussani, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and D. Recchia, Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 May 2011 in Case T-489/08 Power-One Italy v Commission by which that court dismissed an action for compensation for the loss allegedly sustained by the appellant following the Commission’s decision to end the Pneuma project (LIFE04 ENV/IT/000595) intended to co-fund development of a new system of supplying power for use in mobile telephony — Legitimate expectations — Obligation to state reasons

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Power-One Italy SpA is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 282, 24.09.2011.
Case C-176/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — HIT hoteli, igralnice, turizem dd Nova Gorica and HIT LARIX, prirejanje posebnih iger na srečo in turizem dd v Bundesminister für Finanzen (Article 56 TFEU — Restriction on the freedom to provide services — Games of chance — Legislation of a Member State prohibiting the advertising of casinos located in other States if the level of legal protection for gamblers in those States is not equivalent to that ensured at national level — Justification — Overriding reasons in the public interest — Proportionality)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: advertising, freedom to provide services, game of chance, interpretation of the law, principle of proportionality








C_2012287EN.01001301.xml










22.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/13





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — HIT hoteli, igralnice, turizem dd Nova Gorica and HIT LARIX, prirejanje posebnih iger na srečo in turizem dd v Bundesminister für Finanzen
(Case C-176/11) (1)

(Article 56 TFEU - Restriction on the freedom to provide services - Games of chance - Legislation of a Member State prohibiting the advertising of casinos located in other States if the level of legal protection for gamblers in those States is not equivalent to that ensured at national level - Justification - Overriding reasons in the public interest - Proportionality)
2012/C 287/21
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: HIT hoteli, igralnice, turizem dd Nova Gorica and HIT LARIX, prirejanje posebnih iger na srečo in turizem dd

Defendant: Bundesminister für Finanzen

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Verfassungsgerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 56 TFEU et seq. — Freedom to provide services — Games of chance — Legislation of a Member State prohibiting the advertising in its territory of casinos located in other States if the level of legal protection for gamblers in those States is not considered equivalent to the level of protection ensured at national level

Operative part of the judgment

Article 56 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State which permits the advertising in that State of casinos located in another Member State only where the legal provisions for the protection of gamblers adopted in that other Member State provide guarantees that are in essence equivalent to those of the corresponding legal provisions in force in the first Member State.


(1)  OJ C 226, 30.7.2011.
Case T-361/11: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Hand Held Products v OHIM — Orange Brand Services (DOLPHIN) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark DOLPHIN — Earlier Community word mark DOLPHIN — Opposition refused in part — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, digital technology, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012258EN.01002001.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/20





Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Hand Held Products v OHIM — Orange Brand Services (DOLPHIN)
(Case T-361/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark DOLPHIN - Earlier Community word mark DOLPHIN - Opposition refused in part - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2012/C 258/36
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Hand Held Products, Inc. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: J. Güell Serra and M. Curell Aguilà, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by P. Bullock and R. Pethke and subsequently by P. Bullock and G. Schneider, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Orange Brand Services Ltd (Bristol, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1443/2010-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Hand Held Products, Inc. and Orange Brand Services Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1443/2010-1) in so far as it rejected the opposition in respect of electrical and electronic accessories;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders Hand Held Products, Inc. and OHIM each to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 269, 10.9.2011.
Case T-264/00: Order of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Compagnia Generale delle Acque v Commission (Annulment action — State aid — Reductions in social security contributions for undertakings in Venice and Chioggia — Commission decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the common market and imposing the recovery of the aid paid — Action partially inadmissible and partially manifestly devoid of any basis in law)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, State aid, Veneto, common market, social-security contribution, tax relief








C_2012258EN.01002101.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/21





Order of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Compagnia Generale delle Acque v Commission
(Case T-264/00) (1)

(Annulment action - State aid - Reductions in social security contributions for undertakings in Venice and Chioggia - Commission decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the common market and imposing the recovery of the aid paid - Action partially inadmissible and partially manifestly devoid of any basis in law)
2012/C 258/38
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Compagnia Generale delle Acque SpA (Venice, Italy) (represented by: A. Biagnini, P. Petinelli and A. Bortoluzzi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, Agent and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Italian Republic (represented initially by U. Leanza, then I. Braguglia, then R. Adam, and finally by I. Bruni, Agents, and G. Aiello and P. Gentili, avvocati dello Stato)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws No 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000 L 150, p. 50).

Operative part of the order







1.


The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission relates to the substance of the case.










2.


The action is dismissed as being partially manifestly inadmissible and partially manifestly devoid of any basis in law.










3.


Compagnia Generale delle Acque SpA is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission.










4.


The Italian Republic is ordered to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 355, 9.12.2000.
Case C-326/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — J.J. Komen en Zonen Beheer Heerhugowaard BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13B(g), read in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) — Supply of buildings and the land upon which they stand — Supply of a building undergoing work with the view to the creation of a new building by transformation — Continuation and completion of the work by the purchaser after the supply — Exemption from VAT)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, building, housing policy, interpretation of the law, tax exemption, tax harmonisation








C_2012287EN.01001601.xml










22.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/16





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — J.J. Komen en Zonen Beheer Heerhugowaard BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-326/11) (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive - Article 13B(g), read in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) - Supply of buildings and the land upon which they stand - Supply of a building undergoing work with the view to the creation of a new building by transformation - Continuation and completion of the work by the purchaser after the supply - Exemption from VAT)
2012/C 287/27
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: J.J. Komen en Zonen Beheer Heerhugowaard BV

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpretation of Articles 4(3)(a) and 13B(g) of 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 (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Exemptions provided for in the Sixth Directive — Exemption for supplies of buildings and the land on which they stand — Supply of a building on which work is being carried out with a view to the creation of a new building — Continuation and completion of the work by the purchaser after the supply

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(g) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, read in conjunction with Article 4(3)(a) of that directive, must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from value added tax provided for in that first provision covers a supply of immovable property consisting of a plot of land and an old building undergoing transformation into a new building, such as that in issue in the main proceedings, where, at the time of that supply, the old building had only undergone partial demolition work and was, at least in part, still used as such.


(1)  OJ C 269, 10.9.2011.
Case T-61/11: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Vermop Salmon v OHIM — Leifheit (Clean Twist) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark Clean Twist — Earlier Community word marks TWIX and TWIXSTER — Relative ground of refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2012-07-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012258EN.01001803.xml










25.8.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 258/18





Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Vermop Salmon v OHIM — Leifheit (Clean Twist)
(Case T-61/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark Clean Twist - Earlier Community word marks TWIX and TWIXSTER - Relative ground of refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2012/C 258/32
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Vermop Salmon GmbH (Gilching, Germany) (represented by: W. von der Osten-Sacken, M. Ring and O. Sude, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Leifheit AG (Nassau, Germany) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt and V. Töbelmann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 November 2010 (Case R 671/2010-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Vermop Salmon GmbH and Leifheit AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Vermop Salmon GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 19.3.2011.