do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-89/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2013 — Marrone v Commission (Civil Service — Officials — Appointment — Principle of equivalence of careers — Placement in grade applying new rules which are less favourable — Request for reclassification — Lateness — New Facts — None — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, equal treatment, professional career








C_2013252EN.01005103.xml










31.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/51






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2013 — Marrone v Commission
(Case F-89/12) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Appointment - Principle of equivalence of careers - Placement in grade applying new rules which are less favourable - Request for reclassification - Lateness - New Facts - None - Manifest inadmissibility)
(2013/C 252/95)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Stefania Marrone (Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues, A. Blot and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision not to reclassify the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Ms Marrone shall bear her own costs and pay those of the European Commission.






(1)  
            OJ C 331, 27.10.2012, p. 33.
Case T-331/13: Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Nikolaou v Commission and European Central Bank
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, Euro Group (euro area), abuse of power, central bank








C_2013252EN.01003501.xml










31.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/35





Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Nikolaou v Commission and European Central Bank
(Case T-331/13)
2013/C 252/58
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Marinos Nikolaou (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: E. Εfstathiou, K. Εfstathiou and K. Liasidou, lawyers)

Defendants: European Central Bank, European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


declare the action to be admissible and well founded;










—


annul the decision of the Eurogroup of 25 March 2013, which took its final form through the decision of the Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus as the representative and/or agent of the European System of Central Banks dated 29 Μarch 2013, K.D.P [Regulatory Administrative Act] 104/2013, whereby the ‘sale of certain operations’ of Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co Ltd was decided and which in essence constitutes a joint decision of not only the European Central Bank but also of the European Commission;










—


in addition, declare that the abovementioned decision of the Eurogroup in essence constitutes a decision of the European Central Bank and/or of the European Commission jointly irrespective of the shape or form in which it was dressed;










—


order the European Central Bank and/or the European Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action the applicant puts forward four pleas in law.






1.


By the first plea for annulment the applicant maintains that the contested decision is null and void, since the decision exceeds the powers conferred by the Treaty on European Union on not only the European Central Bank but also the European Commission, that is to say, it is an act which was ultra vires of those two institutions.










2.


By the second plea for annulment, the applicant maintains that the contested decision is in breach of the right to respect for property, which is protected by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, as confirmed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










3.


By the third plea for annulment, the applicant maintains that the contested decision is manifestly unfounded and lacking any legal basis and is contrary to the principle of proportionality.










4.


By the fourth plea for annulment, the applicant maintains that the contested decision is also contrary to the generally recognised legal principles which have been disseminated in European Union law and in particular to the principle that no-one may rely on his own failures to obtain an advantage and/or to justify wrongful and/or unlawful conduct.
Case T-55/09: Order of the General Court of 4 June 2013 — Daniel Swarovski v OHIM — Swarovski (Dabiel Swarovski Privat)
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Austria, EU trade mark, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013225EN.01008203.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/82





Order of the General Court of 4 June 2013 — Daniel Swarovski v OHIM — Swarovski (Dabiel Swarovski Privat)
(Case T-55/09) (1)

2013/C 225/184
Language of the case: German
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
Case T-330/13: Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Chatziiannou v Commission and European Central Bank
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, Euro Group (euro area), abuse of power, central bank








C_2013252EN.01003401.xml










31.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/34





Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Chatziiannou v Commission and European Central Bank
(Case T-330/13)
2013/C 252/57
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Lella Chatziiannou (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: E. Εfstathiou, K. Εfstathiou and K. Liasidou, lawyers)

Defendants: European Central Bank and European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


declare the action to be admissible and well founded;










—


annul the decision of the Eurogroup of 25 March 2013, which took its final form through the decision of the Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus as the representative and/or agent of the European System of Central Banks dated 29 Μarch 2013, K.D.P [Regulatory Administrative Act] 104/2013, whereby the ‘sale of certain operations’ of Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co Ltd was decided and which in essence constitutes a joint decision of not only the European Central Bank but also of the European Commission;










—


in addition, declare that the abovementioned decision of the Eurogroup in essence constitutes a decision of the European Central Bank and/or of the European Commission jointly irrespective of the shape or form in which it was dressed;










—


order the European Central Bank and/or the European Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action the applicant puts forward four pleas in law.






1.


By the first plea for annulment the applicant maintains that the contested decision is null and void, since the decision exceeds the powers conferred by the Treaty on European Union on not only the European Central Bank but also the European Commission, that is to say, it is an act which was ultra vires of those two institutions.










2.


By the second plea for annulment, the applicant maintains that the contested decision is in breach of the right to respect for property, which is protected by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, as confirmed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










3.


By the third plea for annulment, the applicant maintains that the contested decision is manifestly unfounded and lacking any legal basis and is contrary to the principle of proportionality.










4.


By the fourth plea for annulment, the applicant maintains that the contested decision is also contrary to the generally recognised legal principles which have been disseminated in European Union law and in particular to the principle that no-one may rely on his own failures to obtain an advantage and/or to justify wrongful and/or unlawful conduct.
Case C-306/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Brussel (Belgium) lodged on 4 June 2013 — LVP NV v Belgische Staat
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: GATT, customs tariff, interpretation of the law, trade agreement (EU), tropical fruit








C_2013252EN.01002001.xml










31.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/20





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Brussel (Belgium) lodged on 4 June 2013 — LVP NV v Belgische Staat
(Case C-306/13)
2013/C 252/30
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: LVP NV

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Question referred

Does Council Regulation (EC) No 1964/2005 of 29 November 2005 on the tariff rates for bananas (OJ 2002 L 316, p. 1), as applied by the European Union in the period from 1 January 2006 to 15 December 2009, infringe Article I; Article XIII(1); Article XIII(2)(d); Article XXVIII; and/or any other applicable article of the GATT 1994, individually or collectively, by introducing a tariff rate of EUR 176/tonne for bananas (GN Code 0803 00 19), contrary to the concessions for bananas negotiated by the EC, before a new negotiated agreement in that regard was concluded within the framework of the WTO?
Case T-327/13: Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Mallis and Malli v Commission and European Central Bank
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cyprus, Euro Group (euro area), abuse of power, central bank








C_2013252EN.01003202.xml










31.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/32





Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Mallis and Malli v Commission and European Central Bank
(Case T-327/13)
2013/C 252/54
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicants: Constantinos Mallis (Larnaca, Cyprus) and Elli Malli (Larnaca, Cyprus) (represented by: E. Εfstathiou, K. Εfstathiou and K. Liasidou, lawyers)

Defendants: European Central Bank and European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:






—


Declare the action to be admissible and well founded;










—


annul the decision of the Eurogroup of 25 March 2013, which took its final form through the decision of the Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus as the representative and/or agent of the European System of Central Banks dated 29 Μarch 2013, K.D.P [Regulatory Administrative Act] 104/2013, whereby the ‘sale of certain operations’ of Cyprus Popular Bank Public Co Ltd was decided and which in essence constitutes a joint decision of not only the European Central Bank but also of the European Commission;










—


In addition, declare that the abovementioned decision of the Eurogroup in essence constitutes a joint decision of the European Central Bank and/or of the European Commission irrespective of the shape or form in which it was dressed;










—


order the European Central Bank and/or the European Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action the applicants put forward four pleas in law.






1.


By the first plea for annulment the applicants maintain that the contested decision is null and void, since the decision exceeds the powers conferred by the Treaty on European Union on not only the European Central Bank but also the European Commission, and is manifestly an act which was ultra vires of those two institutions.










2.


By the second plea for annulment, the applicants maintain that the contested decision is in breach of the right to respect for property, which is protected by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, as confirmed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.










3.


By the third plea for annulment, the applicants maintain that the contested decision is manifestly unfounded and lacking any legal basis and is contrary to the principle of proportionality.










4.


By the fourth plea for annulment, the applicants maintain that the contested decision is also contrary to the generally recognised legal principles which have been disseminated in European Union law and in particular to the principle that no-one may rely on his own failures to obtain an advantage and/or to justify wrongful and/or unlawful conduct.
Joined Cases T-431/10 and T-560/10: Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2013 — Nencini v Parliament (Rules Governing the Payment of Expenses and Allowances to Members of the European Parliament — Travel and parliamentary assistance expenses — Recovery of undue payments — Limitation period — Reasonable period — Rights of the defence — Principle of audi alteram partem — Proportionality)
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, principle of proportionality, redemption








C_2013225EN.01006401.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/64





Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2013 — Nencini v Parliament
(Joined Cases T-431/10 and T-560/10) (1)

(Rules Governing the Payment of Expenses and Allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Travel and parliamentary assistance expenses - Recovery of undue payments - Limitation period - Reasonable period - Rights of the defence - Principle of audi alteram partem - Proportionality)
2013/C 225/142
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Riccardo Nencini (Barberino del Mugello, Italy) (represented by: F. Bertini and M. Chiti, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented initially by N. Lorenz, D. Moore and A. Caiola, and subsequently by N. Lorenz, D. Moore and G. Ricci, acting as Agents)

Re:

Applications, primarily, for annulment brought against the Decisions of the Secretary General of the European Parliament of 16 July 2010 and 7 October 2010 relating to the recovery of certain sums received by the applicant, a former Member of the European Parliament, in respect of travel and parliamentary assistance expenses unduly paid, the Debit Notes of the Director General of the European Parliament’s Directorate-General for Finances, No 312331 of 4 August 2010 and No 315653 of 13 October 2010, and any other related and/or prior acts and, in the alternative, to remit the applications to the Secretary General of the European Parliament for a fair reassessment of the sum in respect of which recovery is sought.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action in Case T-560/10;










2.


Orders Riccardo Nencini to pay the costs in Case T-560/10, including the costs relating to the interim proceedings;










3.


Orders Case T-431/10 to be removed from the register;










4.


Orders each party to bear their own costs in Case T-431/10, including the costs relating to the interim proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 317, 20.11.2010.
Case F-119/11: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single judge) of 4 June 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission (Civil service — Article 34(1) of the Rules of Procedure — Application lodged by fax within the time-limit for bringing proceedings and signed by means of a seal or other means of reproducing the lawyer’s signature — Action lodged out of time)
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, administrative formalities, breach of domicile, provision of documents








C_2013252EN.01004903.xml










31.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/49





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single judge) of 4 June 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case F-119/11) (1)

(Civil service - Article 34(1) of the Rules of Procedure - Application lodged by fax within the time-limit for bringing proceedings and signed by means of a seal or other means of reproducing the lawyer’s signature - Action lodged out of time)
2013/C 252/89
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and J. Banquero Cruz, Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s implied decision rejecting the applicant’s claim for, first, compensation for the damage purportedly sustained as a result of the fact that agents of the Commission entered his official lodgings in Luanda on 14, 16 and 19 March 2002 and, second, communication to him of the copies of the photographs taken on that occasion and the destruction of all documentation relating to that event.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded.










2.


Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 25, 28.1.2012, p. 71.
2013/279/CFSP: Political and Security Committee Decision EUPOL AFGHANISTAN/1/2013 of 4 June 2013 extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN)
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: Political and Security Committee
Subjects: Afghanistan, EU police mission, appointment of members








L_2013160EN.01001401.xml










12.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 160/14








            POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION EUPOL AFGHANISTAN/1/2013
of 4 June 2013
         
extending the mandate of the Head of Mission of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN)
(2013/279/CFSP)


THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular the third paragraph of Article 38 thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision 2010/279/CFSP of 18 May 2010 on the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN) (1), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Decision 2010/279/CFSP, the Political and Security Committee is authorised, in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 38 of the Treaty, to take the relevant decisions for the purpose of exercising political control and strategic direction of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN), including the decision to appoint a Head of Mission.












(2)


On 27 May 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/240/CFSP (2) extending the duration of EUPOL AFGHANISTAN until 31 December 2014.












(3)


On 10 July 2012, the Political and Security Committee adopted decision EUPOL AFGHANISTAN/1/2012 (3), appointing Mr Karl Åke ROGHE as Head of Mission of EUPOL AFGHANISTAN from 1 August 2012 to 31 May 2013.












(4)


On 29 May 2013, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy proposed the extension of the mandate of Mr Karl Åke ROGHE as Head of Mission of EUPOL AFGHANISTAN from 1 June 2013 to 31 December 2014,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The mandate of Mr Karl Åke ROGHE as Head of Mission of the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL AFGHANISTAN) is hereby extended until 31 December 2014.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on 1 June 2013.




Done at Brussels, 4 June 2013.


For the Political and Security Committee


The Chairperson

O. SKOOG
            





(1)  
            OJ L 123, 19.5.2010, p. 4.

(2)  
            OJ L 141, 28.5.2013, p. 44.

(3)  
            OJ L 208, 3.8.2012, p. 17.
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,50 % on 1 June 2013 — Euro exchange rates
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, financing, interest








C_2013157EN.01000201.xml










4.6.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 157/2





Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):
0,50 % on 1 June 2013
Euro exchange rates (2)

3 June 2013
2013/C 157/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3008




JPY


Japanese yen


130,37




DKK


Danish krone


7,4542




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85180




SEK


Swedish krona


8,5723




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2456




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,5970




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


25,753




HUF


Hungarian forint


295,40




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7015




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2666




RON


Romanian leu


4,4080




TRY


Turkish lira


2,4605




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3457




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3455




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0989




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6268




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6367




KRW


South Korean won


1 467,09




ZAR


South African rand


12,9658




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,9761




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5415




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 753,98




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,0312




PHP


Philippine peso


54,709




RUB


Russian rouble


41,5710




THB


Thai baht


39,622




BRL


Brazilian real


2,7752




MXN


Mexican peso


16,5982




INR


Indian rupee


73,8140






(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-307/13: Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Capella v OHIM — Oribay Mirror Buttons (ORIBAY)
Date: 2013-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013207EN.01005401.xml










20.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/54





Action brought on 4 June 2013 — Capella v OHIM — Oribay Mirror Buttons (ORIBAY)
(Case T-307/13)
2013/C 207/90
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Capella EOOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: M. Holtorf, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Oribay Mirror Buttons, SL (San Sebastián, Spain)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 22 March 2013 in Case R 164/2012-4;










—


Declare revoked the registration of Community trade mark 003611282 ‘ORIBAY ORIginal Buttons for Automotive Yndustry’ for the following goods and services:






—


Class 12: Vehicles and parts for vehicles not included in other classes, with the exception of parts for vehicle windows and windscreens; and










—


Class 37: Repair; repair and maintenance














—


Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings including the costs incurred in the appeal proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made: figurative mark, which contains the word elements ‘ORIBAY ORIginal Buttons for Automotive Yndustry, for goods and services in Classes 12, 37 and 40 — Community trade mark No 3 611 282

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Oribay Mirror Buttons, SL

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

Decision of the Cancellation Division: The application for revocation was partially upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was upheld and the application for revocation completely rejected

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009, infringement of Article 56 of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Rule 37(a)(iii) of Regulation No 2868/95 and infringement of Article 57(2) of Regulation No 207/2009