do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 26 November 2012 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/C.39654 — Thomson Reuters Instrument Codes — Rapporteur: Luxembourg
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: data transmission, dominant position, financial services, patents licence








C_2013326EN.01000201.xml










12.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/2





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 26 November 2012 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/C.39654 — Thomson Reuters Instrument Codes
Rapporteur: Luxembourg
2013/C 326/02






1.


The Advisory Committee shares the Commission's concerns expressed in its draft decision as communicated to the Advisory Committee on 12 November 2012 under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’) and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proceedings concerning Thomson Reuters can be concluded by means of a decision pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the commitments offered by Thomson Reuters are suitable, necessary and proportionate and should be made legally binding on Thomson Reuters.










4.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, in light of the commitments offered by Thomson Reuters, there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission against Thomson Reuters, without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.










5.


The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account any other points raised during the discussion.










6.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Case T-548/11: Order of the General Court of 26 November 2012 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Real Seguros (real,- QUALITY) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Revocation of earlier national trade marks — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, insurance company, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013026EN.01004702.xml










26.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/47





Order of the General Court of 26 November 2012 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Real Seguros (real,- QUALITY)
(Case T-548/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Revocation of earlier national trade marks - No need to adjudicate)
2013/C 26/93
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: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Real Seguros, SA (Porto, Portugal)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 August 2011 (Case R 114/2011-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Real Seguros, SA and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action;










2.


The parties shall bear their own costs incurred before the General Court.






(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.
Case T-549/11: Order of the General Court of 26 November 2012 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Real Seguros (real,- BIO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Revocation of earlier national trade marks — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, insurance company, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013026EN.01004703.xml










26.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/47





Order of the General Court of 26 November 2012 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Real Seguros (real,- BIO)
(Case T-549/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Revocation of earlier national trade marks - No need to adjudicate)
2013/C 26/94
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: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Real Seguros, SA (Porto, Portugal)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 August 2011 (Case R 115/2011-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Real Seguros, SA and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action;










2.


The parties shall bear their own costs incurred before the General Court.






(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.
2012/736/EU: Council Decision of 26 November 2012 appointing a Belgian member and a Belgian alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Belgium, European Committee of the Regions, appointment of members








L_2012329EN.01001801.xml










29.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 329/18








            COUNCIL DECISION
         
of 26 November 2012
         
appointing a Belgian member and a Belgian alternate member of the Committee of the Regions
(2012/736/EU)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Belgian Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.












(2)


A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Charles PICQUÉ.












(3)


An alternate member’s seat will become vacant following the appointment of Mr Alain HUTCHINSON as member of the Committee of the Regions,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following are hereby appointed to the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2015:






(a)


as member:






—


Mr Alain HUTCHINSON, Membre du Parlement de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale,




and










(b)


as alternate member:






—


Mr Charles PICQUÉ, Ministre-Président du Gouvernement de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale.










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




Done at Brussels, 26 November 2012.


For the Council


The President

G. DEMOSTHENOUS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 348, 29.12.2009, p. 22.

(2)  
            OJ L 12, 19.1.2010, p. 11.
Case C-538/12: Action brought on 26 November 2012 — European Commission v Republic of Slovenia
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Slovenia, award of contract, common security and defence policy, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure, periodic penalty payment, services contract, supplies contract, works contract








C_2013026EN.01003801.xml










26.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/38





Action brought on 26 November 2012 — European Commission v Republic of Slovenia
(Case C-538/12)
2013/C 26/71
Language of the case: Slovenian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by P. Hetsch, A. Tokár and D. Kukovec, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Slovenia

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:






—


declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to transpose Directive 2009/81/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the coordination of procedures for the award of certain works contracts, supply contracts and service contracts by contracting authorities or entities in the fields of defence and security, and amending Directives 2004/17/EC (2) and 2004/18/EC, (3) or in any case by failing to notify the Commission of those measures, the Republic of Slovenia has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives;










—


order the Republic of Slovenia, pursuant to Article 260(3) TFEU, to make a daily penalty payment of EUR 7 038,72, calculated from the day on which judgment shall be given in these proceedings;










—


order the Republic of Slovenia to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposition of the directive expired on 21 August 2011.


(1)  OJ 2009 L 216, p. 76.

(2)  OJ 2004 L 134, p. 1.

(3)  OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114.
Case C-539/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from Employment Tribunal (United Kingdom) made on 26 November 2012 — ZJR Lock v British Gas Trading Limited & Others
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, paid leave, pay








C_2013046EN.01001303.xml










16.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/13





Reference for a preliminary ruling from Employment Tribunal (United Kingdom) made on 26 November 2012 — ZJR Lock v British Gas Trading Limited & Others
(Case C-539/12)
2013/C 46/25
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Employment Tribunal

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ZJR Lock

Defendants: British Gas Trading Limited & Others

Questions referred







1.


Where






(i)


a worker’s annual pay comprises of basic pay and commission payments made under a contractual right to commission










(ii)


the commission is paid by reference to sales made and contracts entered into by the employer in consequence of the worker’s work










(iii)


commission is paid in arrears and the amount of commission received in a given reference period fluctuates according to the value of sales achieved and contracts entered into and the time of such sales










(iv)


during periods of annual leave, the worker does not undertake any work that would entitle him to those commission payments and accordingly does not generate commission in respect of such periods










(v)


during the pay period which includes a period of annual leave, the worker is entitled to basic pay and will continue to receive commission payments based on commission earned earlier; and










(vi)


his average commission earnings over the course of the year will be lower than they would be if the worker had not taken leave, because, during the leave period, he will not have undertaken any work that would entitle him to commission payments




does Article 7 of Directive 93/104/EC (1), as amended by Directive 2003/88/EC (2), require that Member States take measures to ensure that a worker is paid in respect of periods of annual leave by reference to the commission payments he would have earned during that period, had he not taken leave, as well as his basic pay?










2.


What are the principles which inform the answer to question 1.?










3.


If the answer to question 1 is ‘Yes’, what principles (if any) are required to be adopted by member states in calculating the sum that is payable to the worker by reference to the commission that the worker would or might have earned if he had not taken annual leave?






(1)  Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time
OJ L 307, p. 18

(2)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time
OJ L 299, p. 9
Case C-537/12: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 1 de Catarroja (Spain) lodged on 26 November 2012 — Banco Popular Español S.A. v Maria Teodolinda Rivas Quichimbo and Wilmar Edgar Cun Pérez
Date: 2012-11-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, bank, consumer protection, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2013038EN.01001102.xml










9.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/11





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 1 de Catarroja (Spain) lodged on 26 November 2012 — Banco Popular Español S.A. v Maria Teodolinda Rivas Quichimbo and Wilmar Edgar Cun Pérez
(Case C-537/12)
2013/C 38/14
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 1 de Catarroja

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Banco Popular Español S.A.

Defendants: Maria Teodolinda Rivas Quichimbo and Wilmar Edgar Cun Pérez

Questions referred







1.


(Must) Directive 93/13/EEC (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which prevents a judicial authority hearing mortgage enforcement proceedings such as those governed by Articles 681 to 695 of the Spanish Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil 1/2000 from examining, either of its own motion or at the request of a party, the unfairness of a clause contained in a contract concluded between a supplier or seller and a consumer, whether or not the latter has formulated opposition(?)










2.


Regardless of whether the answer to (that question) is positive or negative, (must) Directive 93/13 be interpreted as precluding national legislation which prevents a judicial authority hearing mortgage enforcement proceedings of the kind governed by Articles 681 to 695 of the Spanish Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil 1/2000 from suspending those proceedings in the event that declaratory proceedings are subsequently initiated in which a declaration is sought as to the unfairness of a clause contained in the contract concluded between a supplier or seller and a consumer, the said contract having been relied upon to commence the abovementioned enforcement proceedings(?)






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).