do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Action brought on 3 July 2013 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-14/13)
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Iceland, equal treatment, free movement of capital, infringement of EU law, right of establishment, tax on income








C_2013294EN.01000901.xml










10.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/9





Action brought on 3 July 2013 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-14/13)
2013/C 294/09
An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 3 July 2013 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Xavier Lewis, Gjermund Mathisen and Auður Ýr Steinarsdóttir, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, 35 rue Belliard, 1040 Brussels, Belgium.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to declare that:






1.


by maintaining in force a difference in treatment between domestic mergers and cross-border mergers as a result of the application of Article 51, paragraph 1 of Act No 90/2003 on Income Tax (lög nr. 90/2003 um tekjuskatt), Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations arising from Articles 31 and 40 of the Agreement of the European Economic Area;










2.


Iceland shall bear the costs of these proceedings.




Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:






—


The present application by the EFTA Surveillance Authority addresses the failure by Iceland to fulfil its obligations as regards the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital under Articles 31 and 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘EEA Agreement’), by imposing an immediate tax on assets and shares of companies that merge cross-border with companies established in the other EEA States and on shareholders of such companies, whereas similar transactions within the Icelandic territory do not attract any immediate tax consequences.










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority submits that this different treatment between domestic mergers and cross-border mergers is not justified and is, therefore, incompatible with Articles 31 and 40 of the EEA Agreement.
Case T-206/12: Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — GRE v OHIM — Villiger Söhne (LIBERTE american blend against a red background) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark LIBERTE american blend — Earlier Community word mark La LIBERTAD — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2013233EN.01000801.xml










10.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 233/8





Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — GRE v OHIM — Villiger Söhne (LIBERTE american blend against a red background)
(Case T-206/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark LIBERTE american blend - Earlier Community word mark La LIBERTAD - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 233/13
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH (Kloster Lehnin, Germany) (represented by: I. Memmler and S. Schulz, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Villiger Söhne GmbH (Waldshut-Tiengen, Germany) (represented by: B. Pikolin and H. McKenzie, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 March 2012 (Case R 411/2011-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Villiger Söhne GmbH and GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 209, 14.7.2012.
Action brought on 3 July 2013 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland (Case E-12/13)
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Iceland, credit institution, financial control, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure








C_2013294EN.01000401.xml










10.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/4





Action brought on 3 July 2013 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Iceland
(Case E-12/13)
2013/C 294/04
An action against Iceland was brought before the EFTA Court on 3 July 2013 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Xavier Lewis, Clémence Perrin and Catherine Howdle, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, 35 Rue Belliard, 1040 Brussels, Belgium.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to:






1.


declare that by failing to implement correctly Article 1, paragraphs 15-18, 19(a), 21, 22(a), 23-29, 36-37, 39-42 and Article 2, paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Act referred to at points 14, 16e and 31 of Annex IX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/111/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 as regards banks affiliated to central institutions, certain own funds items, large exposures, supervisory arrangements and crisis management), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, and by failing to inform the Authority of the text of such measures, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement;










2.


order Iceland to bear the costs of these proceedings.




Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:






—


The application addresses the failure by Iceland to comply, no later than 12 November 2012, with reasoned opinion issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority on 12 September 2012 on the failure to correctly implement Article 1, paragraphs 15-18, 19(a), 21, 22(a), 23-29, 36-37, 39-42 and Article 2, paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Act referred to at points 14, 16e and 31 of Annex IX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/111/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 as regards banks affiliated to central institutions, certain own funds items, large exposures, supervisory arrangements and crisis management).










—


The EFTA Surveillance Authority submits that Iceland has failed to fully implement the Act within the time limit prescribed and to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority accordingly.
Case T-78/12: Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — GRE v OHIM — Villiger Söhne (LIBERTE brunes) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark LIBERTE brunes — Earlier Community word and figurative marks La LIBERTAD — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2013233EN.01000602.xml










10.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 233/6





Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — GRE v OHIM — Villiger Söhne (LIBERTE brunes)
(Case T-78/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark LIBERTE brunes - Earlier Community word and figurative marks La LIBERTAD - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 233/10
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH (Kloster Lehnin, Germany) (represented by: I. Memmler and S. Schulz, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider and D. Walicka, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Villiger Söhne GmbH (Waldshut-Tiengen, Germany) (represented by: H. McKenzie and B. Pikolin, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 December 2011 (Case R 2109/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Villiger Söhne GmbH and GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 109, 14.4.2012.
European Parliament decision of 3 July 2013 electing the European Ombudsman
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Ombudsman, appointment of members








C_2016075EN.01027401.xml










26.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 75/274





P7_TA(2013)0303
Election of the Ombudsman
European Parliament decision of 3 July 2013 electing the European Ombudsman
(2016/C 075/37)

The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the third paragraph of Article 24 and Article 228 thereof,










—


having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,










—


having regard to its Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman's duties (1),










—


having regard to Rule 204 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the call for nominations (2),










—


having regard to its vote of 3 July 2013,












1.


Elects Emily O'REILLY to exercise the function of European Ombudsman from 1 October 2013 until the end of the parliamentary term;












2.


Requests Emily O'REILLY to take an oath before the Court of Justice;












3.


Instructs its President to have the annexed decision published in the Official Journal of the European Union;












4.


Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Council, the Commission and the Court of Justice.






(1)  OJ L 113, 4.5.1994, p. 15.

(2)  OJ C 96, 4.4.2013, p. 24.



ANNEX


DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT


of 3 July 2013


electing the European Ombudsman


(The text of this annex is not reproduced here since it corresponds to the final act, Decision 2013/377/EU, Euratom.)
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 July 2013 on the draft Council decision amending Decision 97/836/EC with a view to accession by the European Community to the Agreement of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe concerning the adoption of uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be fitted to and/or be used on wheeled vehicles and the conditions for reciprocal recognition of approvals granted on the basis of these prescriptions (‘Revised 1958 Agreement’) (05978/2013 — C7-0069/2013 — 2012/0099(NLE))
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, Committee on International Trade, Committee on Transport and Tourism, Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, European Parliament
Subjects: UN regional commission, accession to an agreement, agreement (EU), consent procedure, motor vehicle, revision of an agreement, spare part, technical regulations, two-wheeled vehicle, vehicle parts








C_2016075EN.01027501.xml










26.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 75/275





P7_TA(2013)0305
Wheeled vehicles (Amendment of Decision 97/836/EC (‘revised 1958 Agreement’)) ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 July 2013 on the draft Council decision amending Decision 97/836/EC with a view to accession by the European Community to the Agreement of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe concerning the adoption of uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be fitted to and/or be used on wheeled vehicles and the conditions for reciprocal recognition of approvals granted on the basis of these prescriptions (‘Revised 1958 Agreement’) (05978/2013 — C7-0069/2013 — 2012/0099(NLE))
(Consent)
(2016/C 075/38)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (05978/2013),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0069/2013),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0192/2013),










1.


Consents to the draft Council decision;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
Case T-348/13: Action brought on 3 July 2013 — Kadhaf Al Dam v Council and Commission
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Libya, common foreign and security policy, international sanctions, principle of legal certainty, private property, rights of the defence








C_2013298EN.01000801.xml










12.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/8





Action brought on 3 July 2013 — Kadhaf Al Dam v Council and Commission
(Case T-348/13)
2013/C 298/13
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ahmed Mohammed Kadhaf Al Dam (Cairo, Egypt) (represented by: H. de Charette, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission and Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


declare inapplicable to the applicant:






—


the Decision to maintain 2013/182 of 22 April 2013 amending Decision 2011/137/CFSP of 28 February 2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya, in so far as it did not remove the applicant’s name from Annex II and Annex IV to Decision 2011/137/CFSP;










—


Decision 2011/137/CFSP of 28 February 2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya in so far as Annexes II and IV thereto include the applicant’s name;










—


Regulation of the Council of the European Union 204/2011 of 2 March 2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya in so far as Annex III thereto includes the applicant’s name;














—


order the Council and the Commission to pay the symbolic amount of EUR 1 as compensation for damage suffered;










—


order the Council and the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of fundamental rights, is in four parts based on:






—


an infringement of the applicant’s rights of the defence, since the applicant was not given a hearing prior to the adoption of the restrictive measures against him;










—


the failure to notify the applicant of the contested measures, notwithstanding the fact that his address was known to the authorities;










—


a failure to state reasons, since the statement of reasons set out in the contested measures in support of the restrictive measures taken against the applicant bears no relation either to the situation in Libya at that time or to the objectives pursued;










—


the failure to hold a hearing.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to property, is in two parts based on:






—


there being no public benefit from or public interest in the restrictive measures taken against the applicant, since the applicant has officially broken off relations with the Libyan government;










—


a lack of legal certainty.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 July 2013 on the draft Council decision amending Decision 2000/125/EC of 31 January 2000 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement concerning the establishing of global technical regulations for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be fitted and/or be used on wheeled vehicles (‘Parallel Agreement’) (05975/2013 — C7-0071/2013 — 2012/0098(NLE))
Date: 2013-07-03
Institutions: Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, Committee on International Trade, Committee on Transport and Tourism, Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, European Parliament
Subjects: agreement (EU), consent procedure, motor vehicle, ratification of an agreement, spare part, technical regulations, two-wheeled vehicle, vehicle parts








C_2016075EN.01027502.xml










26.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 75/275





P7_TA(2013)0306
Wheeled vehicles (Amendment of Council Decision 2000/125/EC (‘parallel agreement’)) ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 3 July 2013 on the draft Council decision amending Decision 2000/125/EC of 31 January 2000 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement concerning the establishing of global technical regulations for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be fitted and/or be used on wheeled vehicles (‘Parallel Agreement’) (05975/2013 — C7-0071/2013 — 2012/0098(NLE))
(Consent)
(2016/C 075/39)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (05975/2013),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0071/2013),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0194/2013),












1.


Consents to the draft Council decision;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.