do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-122/11: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Coordination of social security systems — National rules precluding the indexation, during the period until 1 August 2004 , of pensions of nationals of a Member State which has not concluded a reciprocal agreement or who do not satisfy the condition of residence in the European Union — Residence in a non-member State — Breach of the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality — Inadmissible)
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, discrimination on the basis of nationality, infringement of EU law, pension scheme, residence permit, social-security harmonisation








C_2013108EN.01000202.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/2





Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-122/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 - Coordination of social security systems - National rules precluding the indexation, during the period until 1 August 2004, of pensions of nationals of a Member State which has not concluded a reciprocal agreement or who do not satisfy the condition of residence in the European Union - Residence in a non-member State - Breach of the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality - Inadmissible)
2013/C 108/03
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: V. Kreushitz and G. Rozet, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: L. Van den Broeck and C. Pochet, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: E.-M Mamouna, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 4 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems (OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1) and Articles 18 and 45 TFEU — National rules precluding the indexation, for the period until 1 August 2004, of pensions of nationals of a Member State which had not concluded a reciprocal agreement or who do not satisfy the condition of residence in the European Union — Residence in a non-member State — Infringement of the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality — Lack of justification)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action as inadmissible.










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.










3.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 160, 28.5.2011
Case C-68/12: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Slovakia)) — v Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky v Slovenská sporiteľňa a.s. (Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Agreement concluded between a number of banks — Competitor allegedly operating unlawfully on the market concerned — Effect — None)
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Slovakia, bank, interpretation of the law, restriction on competition, unlawful agreement








C_2013114EN.01001901.xml










20.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 114/19





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Slovakia)) — v Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky v Slovenská sporiteľňa a.s.
(Case C-68/12) (1)

(Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Agreement concluded between a number of banks - Competitor allegedly operating unlawfully on the market concerned - Effect - None)
2013/C 114/27
Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky

Respondent: Slovenská sporiteľňa a.s.

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky — Interpretation of Article 101(1) and (3) TFEU — Cartel — Agreement concluded between several banks with a view to cancelling agreements, and refraining from concluding new agreements, concerning current accounts with a competing undertaking established in another Member State — Effect on the classification as an unlawful agreement of the fact, not raised at the time when the agreement was entered into, that the competing undertaking was operating unlawfully on the market in question

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 101 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that an undertaking that is adversely affected by an agreement whose object is the restriction of competition was allegedly operating illegally on the relevant market at the time when the agreement was concluded is of no relevance to the question whether the agreement constitutes an infringement of that provision.










2.


Article 101(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to find that an agreement is restrictive of competition, it is not necessary to demonstrate personal conduct on the part of a representative authorised under the undertaking’s constitution or the personal assent, in the form of a mandate, of that representative to the conduct of an employee of the undertaking who has participated in an anti-competitive meeting.










3.


Article 101(3) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that it can apply to an agreement prohibited under Article 101(1) TFEU only when the undertaking which is relying on Article 101(3) TFEU has proved that the four cumulative conditions laid down therein are met.






(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012
Case C-266/12 P: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 — Jarosław Majtczak v Feng Shen Technology Co. Ltd, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeals — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 51(1)(b) — Applicant’s bad faith when filing the Community trade mark — Figurative mark ‘FS’ — Application for a declaration of invalidity)
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, EU trade mark, Ghana, dictionary of abbreviations, product designation, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013129EN.01000403.xml










4.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/4





Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 — Jarosław Majtczak v Feng Shen Technology Co. Ltd, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-266/12 P) (1)

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 51(1)(b) - Applicant’s bad faith when filing the Community trade mark - Figurative mark ‘FS’ - Application for a declaration of invalidity)
2013/C 129/08
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Jarosław Majtczak (represented by: J. Radłowski, radca prawny)

Other parties to the proceedings: Feng Shen Technology Co. Ltd (represented by P. Rath, Rechtsanwalt), Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent,)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 March 2012 in Case T-227/09 Feng Shen Technology v OHIM — Majtczak (FS), by which the General Court annulled Decision R 529/2008-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 1 April 2009 dismissing the appeal brought against the decision of the Cancellation Division which had rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity brought by the applicant against the figurative mark ‘FS’ for goods in Class 26

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Jarosław Majtczak shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 258, 25.8.2012.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6803 — Avolon/Wells Fargo/ACP JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aeronautical industry, business lease, economic concentration, financial institution, merger control








C_2013035EN.01000401.xml










7.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 35/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6803 — Avolon/Wells Fargo/ACP JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 35/05






1.


On 30 January 2013, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Avolon Aerospace Leasing Limited (‘Avolon’, Ireland), ultimately controlled by Cinven and Oak Hill, and Wells Fargo Shareholder, a newly created entity ultimately controlled by Wells Fargo & Company (‘Wells Fargo’, the United States) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Avolon Capital Partners Limited (‘ACP’, Ireland) by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Avolon: acquisition of aircraft and provision of aircraft operating leasing services,










—


for Wells Fargo: provider of banking, insurance, investment, credit card, mortgage, consumer and commercial finance services,










—


for ACP: acquisition of aircraft and provision of aircraft operating leasing services.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6803 — Avolon/Wells Fargo/ACP JV, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).
Case C-499/12: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Tivoli, Italy) — Elisabetta Gentile v Ufficio Finanziario della Direzione Ufficio Territoriale di Tivoli and Others (Request for a preliminary ruling — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Need for a link with European Union law — Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, Italy, income in addition to normal pay, interpretation of the law, jurisdiction, legal aid








C_2013108EN.01001303.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/13





Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Tivoli, Italy) — Elisabetta Gentile v Ufficio Finanziario della Direzione Ufficio Territoriale di Tivoli and Others
(Case C-499/12) (1)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Need for a link with European Union law - Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
2013/C 108/27
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Tivoli

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Elisabetta Gentile

Defendants: Ufficio Finanziario della Direzione Ufficio Territoriale di Tivoli, Fabrizio Penna, Gianfranco Di Nicola

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Tivoli — Interpretation of Article 47 (3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, read in conjunction with Article 6 TEU and Article 52(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Legal aid — National legislation providing that lawyers’ fees are to be halved where the client is awarded legal aid

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly has no jurisdiction to reply to the questions asked by the Tribunal di Tivoli (Italy).


(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.
Case C-517/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 92/43/EEC — Conservation of natural habitats — Article 6(2) — Deterioration and pollution of Lake Koroneia — Protection — Inadequacy of the measures taken — Directive 91/271/EEC — Urban waste-water treatment — Articles 3 and 4(1) and (3) — Agglomeration of Langada — System for the collection and treatment of urban waste-water — ‘Absence’ )
Date: 2013-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Greece, environmental protection, infringement of EU law, wastewater, water pollution, water treatment








C_2013108EN.01000302.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/3





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic
(Case C-517/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats - Article 6(2) - Deterioration and pollution of Lake Koroneia - Protection - Inadequacy of the measures taken - Directive 91/271/EEC - Urban waste-water treatment - Articles 3 and 4(1) and (3) - Agglomeration of Langada - System for the collection and treatment of urban waste-water - ‘Absence’)
2013/C 108/05
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Patakia, S. Petrova, B.D. Simon and L. Banciella, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: E. Skandalou, acting as Agent)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Breach of Article 6(2) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7) — Breach of Articles 3 and 4(1) and (3) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (OJ 1991 L 135, p. 40) — Failure to take the required steps to avoid the deterioration and pollution of Lake Koroneia (Prefecture of Thessalonika) — Failure to set up a system for the collection and treatment of urban waste water for the agglomeration of Langada

Operative part of the judgment







1.


By not having taken all the required steps to avoid the deterioration of the natural habitats and the habitats of species for which the special area of conservation GR 1220009 was designated and by not having set up a system for the collection and treatment of urban waste water for the agglomeration of Langada, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 6(2) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, read in conjunction with Article 7 of that Directive, as well as its obligations under Articles 3 and 4(1) and (3) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment.










2.


The Hellenic Republic is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 362, 10.12.2011.