do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-208/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 15 April 2013 — Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico
Date: 2013-04-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, free competition, freedom to provide services, interpretation of the law, right of establishment, road safety, road transport








C_2013207EN.01001002.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 15 April 2013 — Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico
(Case C-208/13)
2013/C 207/18
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato

Defendants: Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico

Questions referred







1.


Is the protection of freedom of competition, free movement of undertakings, freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services (under Article 4(3) TEU, Article 101 TFEU, and Articles 49, 56 and 96 TFEU) compatible — and, if so, to what extent — with statutory provisions adopted by EU Member States which lay down minimum operating costs for the road haulage sector which involve the fixing by bodies external [to the contracting parties] of a component of the charge for the service concerned and, accordingly, of the contract price?










2.


Are such limitations of those principles justifiable — and, if so, under what conditions — in the light of the need to safeguard the public interest in road traffic safety and, in terms of that functional consideration, is there a proper place for the fixing of minimum operating costs as provided for under Article 83a of Legislative Decree No 112/2008 (as subsequently amended and supplemented)?










3.


Can the determination of minimum operating costs, to the above end, be left — in the absence of criteria predetermined by the legislation — to voluntary agreements between the types of trader concerned, failing which to bodies whose composition is characterised by the strong presence of persons representing private traders in that sector?
Case C-189/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de grande instance de Bayonne (France) lodged on 15 April 2013 — Raquel Gianni Da Silva v Préfet des Pyrénées-Atlantiques
Date: 2013-04-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, illegal migration, imprisonment








C_2013164EN.01001202.xml










8.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de grande instance de Bayonne (France) lodged on 15 April 2013 — Raquel Gianni Da Silva v Préfet des Pyrénées-Atlantiques
(Case C-189/13)
2013/C 164/22
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de grande instance de Bayonne

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Raquel Gianni Da Silva

Defendant: Préfet des Pyrénées-Atlantiques

Question referred

Does European Union law preclude national legislation under which illegal entry by a third-country national who has not been subjected to the coercive measures provided for in Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 is punishable by a sentence of imprisonment? (1)



(1)  Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98).
Case C-195/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 15 April 2013 — Confederazione generale dell'industria italiana (Confindustria) and Others v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico
Date: 2013-04-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, free competition, freedom to provide services, interpretation of the law, right of establishment, road safety, road transport








C_2013207EN.01000901.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/9





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 15 April 2013 — Confederazione generale dell'industria italiana (Confindustria) and Others v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico
(Case C-195/13)
2013/C 207/15
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Confederazione generale dell'industria italiana (Confindustria) and Others

Defendants: Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico

Questions referred







1.


Is the protection of freedom of competition, free movement of undertakings, freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services (under Article 4(3) TEU, Article 101 TFEU, and Articles 49, 56 and 96 TFEU) compatible — and, if so, to what extent — with statutory provisions adopted by EU Member States which lay down minimum operating costs for the road haulage sector which involve the fixing by bodies external [to the contracting parties] of a component of the charge for the service concerned and, accordingly, of the contract price?










2.


Are such limitations of those principles justifiable — and, if so, under what conditions — in the light of the need to safeguard the public interest in road traffic safety and, in terms of that functional consideration, is there a proper place for the fixing of minimum operating costs as provided for under Article 83a of Legislative Decree No 112/2008 (as subsequently amended and supplemented)?










3.


Can the determination of minimum operating costs, to the above end, be left — in the absence of criteria predetermined by the legislation — to voluntary agreements between the types of trader concerned, failing which to bodies whose composition is characterised by the strong presence of persons representing private traders in that sector?
Case C-193/13 P: Appeal brought on 15 April 2013 by nfon AG against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 29 January 2013 in Case T-283/11 Fon Wireless Ltd. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Date: 2013-04-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2013189EN.01000501.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/5





Appeal brought on 15 April 2013 by nfon AG against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 29 January 2013 in Case T-283/11 Fon Wireless Ltd. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-193/13 P)
2013/C 189/09
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: nfon AG (represented by: V. von Bomhard, Rechtsanwältin)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Fon Wireless Ltd.

Form of order sought







—


Set aside the judgment under appeal;










—


In the alternative, set aside the judgment in so far as it upholds a likelihood of confusion on the basis of the earlier Community trade mark No 4719738 ‘fon’ (figure);










—


Order the applicant in the proceedings at first instance to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal is directed against the judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2013 in Case T-283/11, by which the General Court altered the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Fon Wireless Ltd. and nfon AG to the effect that nfon AG’s appeal to the Board of Appeal was dismissed.
The only ground of appeal relied upon by the appellant is an infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark. (1) There must, in the examination of the likelihood of confusion under Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, be a detailed assessment of all the relevant facts of the individual case. The appeal claims that there has been a failure to comply with that requirement in three respects: first, the error of law made in the identification of the distinctive elements of the opposing marks in the comparison of the signs, second, the error made in automatically assuming the existence of a likelihood of confusion and, third, the lack of a comprehensive assessment of the likelihood of confusion on account of the failure to take into account sufficiently the limited distinctiveness of the element ‘fon’.


(1)  OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1.
Case T-215/13: Action brought on 15 April 2013 — Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll/OHIM — Recticel (Lambda)
Date: 2013-04-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013178EN.01001202.xml










22.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/12





Action brought on 15 April 2013 — Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll/OHIM — Recticel (Lambda)
(Case T-215/13)
2013/C 178/23
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll GmbH & Co. OHG (Gladbeck, Germany) (represented by: J. Krenzel, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Recticel SA (Brussels, Belgium)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Set aside the decision of the defendant, R 112/2012-5, and










—


Impose the costs on the defendant.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made: The figurative mark representing the Greek letter lambda in red and white colours, Community trade mark registration No 2 960 789

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Party applying for revocation of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Partially revoked the Community trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partially dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.