do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
List of natural mineral waters recognised by Iceland and Norway (Annuls and replaces the text published in OJ C 28, 4.2.2010, p. 24 and EEA Supplement No 5, 4.2.2010 , p. 1)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: EFTA Secretariat
Subjects: Iceland, Norway, marketing, mineral water








C_2013137EN.01000401.xml










16.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/4





List of natural mineral waters recognised by Iceland and Norway
(Annuls and replaces the text published in OJ C 28, 4.2.2010, p. 24 and EEA Supplement No 5, 4.2.2010, p. 1)
2013/C 137/04
In accordance with Article 1 of Directive 2009/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on the exploitation and marketing of natural mineral waters (1), as incorporated in point 54zzzzd of Chapter XII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement, a list of recognised natural mineral waters shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement thereto.

List of natural mineral waters recognised by Iceland








Trade name


Name of source


Place of exploitation




Icelandic Glacial


Ölfus Spring


Hlíðarendi, Ölfus, Selfoss








List of natural mineral waters recognised by Norway








Trade name


Name of source


Place of exploitation




Bonaqua Silver


Telemark kilden


Fyresdal




Eira


Eira kilden


Eresfjord




Farris


Kong Olavs kilde


Larvik




Isbre


Isbre kilden


Buhaugen, Osa, Ulvik




Isklar


Isklar kildene


Vikebygd i Ullensvang




Modal


Modal kilden


Fyresdal




Olden


Blåfjell kilden


Olderdalen




Osa


Osa kilden


Ulvik/Hardanger




Rustad Spring


Rustad kilden


Rustad/Elverum






(1)  OJ L 164, 26.6.2009, p. 45.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 458/2013 of 16 May 2013 correcting Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: egg, marketing standard, quality control of agricultural products








L_2013133EN.01001701.xml










17.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 133/17








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 458/2013
of 16 May 2013
         
correcting Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1) and in particular Article 121(d) in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 (2) lays down detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs. The wording of the definition of ‘batch’ in Article 1 of that Regulation should be clarified so that it does not give rise to diverging interpretations and thereby to different practices in the Member States.












(2)


Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 should therefore be corrected accordingly.












(3)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
In the second subparagraph of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 point (i) is replaced by the following:






‘(i)


“batch” means the eggs in packs or loose from one and the same production site or packing centre, situated in one place, with one and the same laying date or date of minimum durability or packing date, the same farming method and, in case of graded eggs, the same quality and weight grading;’.






Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 16 May 2013.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 163, 24.6.2008, p. 6.
Case T-104/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Verus v OHIM — Performance Industries Manufacturing (VORTEX) (Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Application for registration of the Community word mark VORTEX — Earlier Community word mark VORTEX — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Right of priority — Article 29 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Partial surrender — Article 50 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Infringement of the right to be heard — Article 75, second sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, spare part, trade-mark law, two-wheeled vehicle








C_2013189EN.01002102.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/21





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Verus v OHIM — Performance Industries Manufacturing (VORTEX)
(Case T-104/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition procedure - Application for registration of the Community word mark VORTEX - Earlier Community word mark VORTEX - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Right of priority - Article 29 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Partial surrender - Article 50 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Infringement of the right to be heard - Article 75, second sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009)
2013/C 189/42
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Verus Eood (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented initially by S. Vykydal, then by F. Henkel, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Performance Industries Manufacturing, Inc. (Odessa, Florida, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Chamber of the Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 December 2011 (Case R 512/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Verus Eood and Performance Industries Manufacturing Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Verus Eood to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 157, 2.6.2012.
Case T-508/10: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Seba Diș Tįcaret ve Naklįyat v OHIM — von Eicken (SEBA TRADITION) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community figurative mark SEBA TRADITION — Earlier national figurative mark JOHANN WILHELM VON EICKEN TRADITION — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2013189EN.01001801.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/18





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Seba Diș Tįcaret ve Naklįyat v OHIM — von Eicken (SEBA TRADITION)
(Case T-508/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark SEBA TRADITION - Earlier national figurative mark JOHANN WILHELM VON EICKEN TRADITION - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 189/33
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Seba Diș Tįcaret ve Naklįyat AȘ (Maltepe, Turkey) (represented by: H. Wilde, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Joh. Wilh. von Eicken GmbH (Lübeck, Germany) (represented by: C. Rohnke and F. Thiering, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 August 2010 (Case R 559/2009-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Joh. Wilh. von Eicken GmbH and Seba Diș Tįcaret ve Naklįyat AȘ.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Seba Diș Tįcaret ve Naklįyat AȘ to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 346, 18.12.2010.
Council Decision of 16 May 2013 appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Cedefop, Spain, appointment of members, decision-making body (EU)








C_2013159EN.01000101.xml










5.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 159/1





COUNCIL DECISION
of 16 May 2013
appointing and replacing members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training
(2013/000/)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),
Having regard to the nomination submitted to the Council by the Commission in the category of Employees' representatives,
Whereas:






(1)


By its Decision of 16 July 2012 (2), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2012 to 17 September 2015.










(2)


A member's seat is available for Spain on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Employees' representatives,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
The following person is hereby appointed as a member of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of the term of office, which runs until 17 September 2015:
REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYEES' ORGANISATIONS:






SPAIN


Mr Francisco Javier LÓPEZ





Done at Brussels, 16 May 2013.


For the Council


The President

R. QUINN




(1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

(2)  OJ C 228, 31.7.2012, p. 3.
Case T-266/13: Action brought on 16 May 2013 — Brainlab v OHIM (Curve)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, health care, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2013215EN.01001401.xml










27.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 215/14





Action brought on 16 May 2013 — Brainlab v OHIM (Curve)
(Case T-266/13)
2013/C 215/18
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Brainlab AG (Feldkirchen, Germany) (represented by J. Bauer, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 March 2013 in Case R 2073/2012-4 and the decision of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 September 2012 in registration procedure No 008608473;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘Curve’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 10, 35, 38, 41, 42, 44 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 8 608 473

Decision of the Examiner: the application was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation No 207/2009
Case C-268/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu (Romania) lodged on 16 May 2013 — Elena Petru v Casa Județeană de Asigurări de Sănătate Sibiu and Casa Națională de Asigurări de Sănătate
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Romania, interpretation of the law, medical device, medicinal product, public health, right to health, surgery








C_2013207EN.01003002.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/30





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu (Romania) lodged on 16 May 2013 — Elena Petru v Casa Județeană de Asigurări de Sănătate Sibiu and Casa Națională de Asigurări de Sănătate
(Case C-268/13)
2013/C 207/50
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Sibiu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Elena Petru

Defendants: Casa Județeană de Asigurări de Sănătate Sibiu, Casa Națională de Asigurări de Sănătate

Question referred

In the light of the second subparagraph of Article 22(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71, (1) is the requirement that the person concerned be unable to obtain treatment in the country of residence to be construed as categorical or as reasonable; that is to say, where, although the required surgery could, in technical terms, be carried out in good time in the country of residence — in that the necessary specialists are present there and have the same level of specialist skills as those abroad — does the lack of medicines and basic medical consumables mean that such a situation can, for the purposes of that provision, be equated with a situation in which the necessary medical treatment cannot be provided?


(1)  Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2, English special edition: Series I Volume 1971(II) P. 416 — 463).
Case F-46/13: Action brought on 16 May 2013 — ZZ v European Commission
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: damages, public contract, servant (EU)








C_2013207EN.01006202.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/62





Action brought on 16 May 2013 — ZZ v European Commission
(Case F-46/13)
2013/C 207/109
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision rejecting the application for the employment of the applicant as a contract agent in function group II submitted by DG DEVCO and compensation for the material damage suffered.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Commission, as AECE, of 4 October 2012 not to recruiter the applicant as an auxiliary contract agent in function group II;










—


so far as necessary, annul the AECE decision of 7 February 2013 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant on 19 October 2012;










—


award compensation for his material damage;










—


award the sum fixed ex aequo et bono and provisionally at EUR 50 000 in respect of non-material damage suffered;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case C-444/12: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 3 October 2012 — Hardimpex Kft (in liquidation) v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Ügyek és Adózók Adó Főigazgatósága
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, VAT, delivery, interpretation of the law, invoicing, tax relief








C_2013225EN.01005501.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/55





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 3 October 2012 — Hardimpex Kft (in liquidation) v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Ügyek és Adózók Adó Főigazgatósága
(Case C-444/12)
2013/C 225/102
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest Municipal Court)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Hardimpex Kft (in liquidation)

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Ügyek és Adózók Adó Főigazgatósága

Question referred


Must Article 168(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax be interpreted as meaning that it precludes a tax authority from refusing a taxable person the right to deduct from the amount of VAT which it owes the amount of VAT paid or to be paid on a supply of goods to it, because an earlier transaction in the chain of supply was irregular under the VAT legislation or because that taxable person can be criticised for having failed to check the origin of the goods featuring in the invoices issued by its supplier, without the tax authority demonstrating to the requisite legal standard that the taxable person knew or should have known of that irregularity?
Communication from the Commission on the quantity of certain products in the milk and milk products sector available for the second half of 2013 under certain quotas opened by the Union
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: import licence, milk product, tariff quota








C_2013137EN.01000101.xml










16.5.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/1





Communication from the Commission on the quantity of certain products in the milk and milk products sector available for the second half of 2013 under certain quotas opened by the Union
2013/C 137/01
Import licences which were allocated for the second half of 2012 for certain quotas referred to in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001 (1), did not cover the full quantity available under those quotas. The remaining quantities are laid out in the Annex. They will be available as of 1 July until 31 December 2013.


(1)  OJ L 341, 22.12.2001, p. 29.


ANNEX






Products originating in the Republic of Moldova




Quota number


Quantity (kg)




09.4210


1 500 000













Butter originating in New Zealand




Quota number


Quantity (kg)




09.4182


31 507 000




09.4195


33 228 000













Products originating in Norway




Quota number


Quantity (kg)




09.4179


5 961 100
Case C-615/11 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — European Commission v Ryanair Ltd (Appeal — Action for failure to act — Article 232 EC — Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 — Article 20(2) — State aid allegedly granted to Italian airlines — Complaint — Lack of a decision from the Commission)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, State aid, air transport, restriction on competition, transport company








C_2013225EN.01001602.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/16





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — European Commission v Ryanair Ltd
(Case C-615/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Action for failure to act - Article 232 EC - Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 - Article 20(2) - State aid allegedly granted to Italian airlines - Complaint - Lack of a decision from the Commission)
2013/C 225/26
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, D. Grespan and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Ryanair Ltd (represented by: E. Vahida, avocat, and I.-G. Metaxas-Maragkidis, dikigoros), Air One SpA (represented by: M. Merola, M.C. Santacroce and G. Belotti, avvocati)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 September 2011 in Case T-442/07 Ryanair v Commission upholding in part an action for failure to act seeking a finding that the Commission had unlawfully failed to adopt a decision on Ryanair’s complaints concerning aid allegedly granted by Italy to Alitalia, Air One and Meridiana in the form of various measures granting advantages to those companies

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 65, 3.3.2012.
Case T-356/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Restoin v OHIM (EQUIPMENT) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark EQUIPMENT — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013189EN.01002001.xml










29.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 189/20





Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2013 — Restoin v OHIM (EQUIPMENT)
(Case T-356/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark EQUIPMENT - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
2013/C 189/39
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Restoin (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Alcaraz, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Chamber of the Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 April 2011 (Case R 1430/2010-4), concerning an application for registration of the word mark EQUIPMENT as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Restoin to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 269, 1.9.2011.
Case C-379/12 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — Arav Holding Srl v H.Eich Srl, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Word mark H.EICH — Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier figurative mark H- SILVIAN HEACH — Refusal of registration)
Date: 2013-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2013225EN.01004803.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/48





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — Arav Holding Srl v H.Eich Srl, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-379/12 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Word mark H.EICH - Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier figurative mark H- SILVIAN HEACH - Refusal of registration)
2013/C 225/85
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Arav Holding Srl (represented by: R. Bocchini, avvocato)

Other parties to the proceedings: H.Eich Srl (represented by: D. Mainini, T. Rubin, A. Masetti Zannini de Concina, M. Bucarelli and G. Petrocchi, avvocati), Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 19 June 2012 in Case T-557/10 H.Eich v OHIM — Arav, by which the General Court annulled the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 September 2010 relating to opposition proceedings between Arav Holding Srl and H.Eich Srl (Case R 1411/2009-1) — Likelihood of confusion — Incorrect appraisal of the similarity of the marks at issue — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Arav Holding Srl shall bear the costs.






(1)  OJ C 303, 6.10.2012