do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-86/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 April 2013 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Taxation — Directive 2006/112/EC — Articles 9 and 11 — National legislation permitting the inclusion of non-taxable persons in a group of persons who may be regarded as a single taxable person for VAT purposes)
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, infringement of EU law, tax exemption, tax harmonisation








C_2013171EN.01000401.xml










15.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/4





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 April 2013 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Case C-86/11) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Taxation - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 9 and 11 - National legislation permitting the inclusion of non-taxable persons in a group of persons who may be regarded as a single taxable person for VAT purposes)
2013/C 171/06
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, acting as Agent)

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Hathaway, acting as Agent, and M. Hall QC)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and T. Müller, acting as Agents), Kingdom of Denmark (represented: initially by C. Vang, and subsequently by V. Pasternak Jørgensen, acting as Agents), Ireland (represented by: D. O’Hagan, acting as Agent, assisted by G. Clohessy, SC, and N. Travers, BL), Republic of Finland (represented by: H. Leppo and S. Hartikainen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 9 and 11 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — National legislation permitting the inclusion of non-taxable persons in a VAT group

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the Republic of Finland to bear their own respective costs.






(1)  OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
Case T-145/12: Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2013 — Bayerische Motoren Werke AG v OHIM (ECO PRO) (Community trade mark — International registration designating the European Community — Word mark ECO PRO — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013164EN.01001603.xml










8.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/16





Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2013 — Bayerische Motoren Werke AG v OHIM (ECO PRO)
(Case T-145/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - International registration designating the European Community - Word mark ECO PRO - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 164/30
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 January 2012 (Case R 1418/2011-4), concerning the international registration designating the European Community of the word sign ECO PRO

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Bayerische Motoren Werke AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6782 — HIG Capital/Petrochem Carless Holdings)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, oil industry








C_2013118EN.01000102.xml










25.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 118/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6782 — HIG Capital/Petrochem Carless Holdings)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 118/02
On 26 March 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6782. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-55/12: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 25 April 2013 — European Commission v Ireland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2003/96/EC — Taxation of energy products and electricity — Exemption from excise duty on fuel used by disabled persons for motor vehicles — Exemption maintained after the expiry of the transitional period — Infringement)
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disabled person, excise duty, fuel tax, motor vehicle, tax exemption








C_2013171EN.01000702.xml










15.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/7





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 25 April 2013 — European Commission v Ireland
(Case C-55/12) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2003/96/EC - Taxation of energy products and electricity - Exemption from excise duty on fuel used by disabled persons for motor vehicles - Exemption maintained after the expiry of the transitional period - Infringement)
2013/C 171/13
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and W. Mölls, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Ireland (represented by: E. Creedon, acting as Agent)

Re:

Breach of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003, on restructuring the Community framework of taxation of energy products and electricity (OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51) — Exemption from excise duty on fuel used by disabled persons for motor vehicles — Exemption maintained after the expiry of the transitional period

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by continuing to grant, after the expiry on 31 December 2006 of the transitional period referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 18(1) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 23 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework of taxation of energy products and electricity, as amended by Council Directive 2004/74/EC of 29 April 2004, and Annex II to that directive, an exemption from excise duty on fuel used by disabled persons for motor vehicles, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) of the directive;










2.


Orders Ireland to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6879 — Mitsui Group/Gestamp Automoción/Target Companies)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, metallurgical industry, motor vehicle industry








C_2013118EN.01000101.xml










25.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 118/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6879 — Mitsui Group/Gestamp Automoción/Target Companies)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 118/01
On 17 April 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6879. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case C-221/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Trento (Italy) lodged on 25 April 2013 — Teresa Mascellani v Ministero della Giustizia
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, dismissal, interpretation of the law, labour relations, temporary employment








C_2013207EN.01001103.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/11





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Trento (Italy) lodged on 25 April 2013 — Teresa Mascellani v Ministero della Giustizia
(Case C-221/13)
2013/C 207/21
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Trento

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Teresa Mascellani

Defendant: Ministero della Giustizia

Questions referred







1.


In so far as it provides that ‘[t]he refusal by a worker to be transferred from full-time to part-time work or vice-versa should not in itself constitute a valid reason for termination of employment, without prejudice to the possibility, under national laws, collective agreements and practice, of termination for other reasons such as may arise from the operational requirements of the establishment concerned’, must Clause 5.2 of the Agreement implemented by Directive 97/81/EC (1) be construed as meaning that provision may not be made in the legislation of Member States for employers to be able to convert a part-time employment relationship into a full-time relationship even where the employee does not consent?










2.


Does Directive 97/81/EC preclude a provision of national law (such as Article 16 of Italian Law No 183 of 4 November 2010) under which employers may convert a part-time employment relationship into a full-time employment relationship even where the employee does not consent?






(1)  Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC (OJ 1998 L 14, p. 9).
Case T-119/11: Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2013 — Gbagbo v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire — Freezing of funds — Alteration of heads of claim — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Misuse of power — Rights of the defence — Right to property)
Date: 2013-04-25
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: common foreign and security policy, international sanctions, ownership, rights of the defence








C_2013164EN.01001501.xml










8.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/15





Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2013 — Gbagbo v Council
(Case T-119/11) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire - Freezing of funds - Alteration of heads of claim - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of power - Rights of the defence - Right to property)
2013/C 164/26
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Simone Gbagbo (Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire) (represented by: J.-C. Tchikaya, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and M. Chavrier, agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bordes and M. Konstantinidis, agents) and the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire (represented by: J.-P. Mignard, J.-P. Benoit and G. Merland, lawyers)

Re:

Initially, an application for annulment, first, of Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 36), and, second, of Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d'Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 1), in so far as those measures concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mrs Simone Gbagbo to bear her own costs and those incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire and the European Commission to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 130, 30.4.2011.