do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-551/10: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Fri-El Acerra v Commission (State aid — Subsidy for the takeover of a thermoelectric power plant and conversion thereof into a biofuel power plant — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market — Application ratione temporis of the guidelines on national regional aid — Legitimate expectations — Incentive effect)
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, State aid, domestic market, power plant, regional aid








C_2013313EN.01002101.xml










26.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 313/21





Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Fri-El Acerra v Commission
(Case T-551/10) (1)

(State aid - Subsidy for the takeover of a thermoelectric power plant and conversion thereof into a biofuel power plant - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Application ratione temporis of the guidelines on national regional aid - Legitimate expectations - Incentive effect)
2013/C 313/38
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Fri-El Acerra Srl (Acerra, Italy) (represented by: M. Todino and P. Fattori, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Grespan and P. Manzini, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/110/EU of 15 September 2010 on State aid C 8/09 (ex N 357/08) which Italy intends to grant to Fri-El Acerra Srl (OJ 2011 L 46, p. 28).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Fri-El Acerra Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6949 — JP Morgan/Findus)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, food industry, merger control








C_2013264EN.01000202.xml










13.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 264/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6949 — JP Morgan/Findus)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 264/03
On 9 September 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 32013M6949. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.
Notice of open selection procedure — ICT Helpdesk Assistant — Reference: EF-TA-13-02
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: Eurofound
Subjects: help desk, job vacancy, servant (EU)








CA2013264EN.01000101.xml










13.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 264/1





NOTICE OF OPEN SELECTION PROCEDURE
ICT Helpdesk Assistant
REFERENCE: EF-TA-13-02
(2013/C 264 A/01)
The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound), based in Dublin, Ireland, is seeking to recruit an ICT Helpdesk Assistant.
Reporting to the Head of ICT, the Helpdesk Assistant will have the following duties:






—


management of requests to ICT helpdesk, providing first level support and assignment of issues for second level support as required;










—


administration of telephone system (Call Manager) and Voicemail (Unity);










—


administration of network printers;










—


management and support for mobile devices (e.g. Blackberrys, iPhones, iPads, smart phones, etc.);










—


assisting the administration of financial and procurement processes related to ICT;










—


support and set-up for new users;










—


help prepare ICT Information and training material;










—


assisting the ICT Technician in deployment of new pcs and equipment;










—


assisting the management of ICT Assets;










—


undertaking such other duties and responsibilities as may be directed.




The Selection Procedure is open to candidates who:






—


are citizens of the European Union and have at least a level of secondary education attested by a diploma giving access to post-secondary education;










—


have three years of relevant experience;










—


are competent in at least two working languages of the Union, including a high level of English;










—


have a very high proficiency in ICT systems, particularly Office applications;










—


have proven strong ICT technical skills (hardware, software, networks);










—


have experience in a customer service role.
A computer-related qualification would be an advantage (e.g. A+ certification, Network+ certification or a similar Microsoft certification).




The successful candidate will be recruited as Temporary Agent (AST 1) on an initial five-year fixed-term contract. The reserve list of candidates set up from this procedure may also be used to fill Contract Agent (Function Group II) vacancies with a similar profile.
Full details of the post as well as the application and selection procedures can be downloaded from the Eurofound website vacancies page:
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/about/vacancies/index.htm
All applications must be submitted on the official application form which can also be downloaded from the website.
Deadline for applications: 11 October 2013.
Case C-490/13 P: Appeal brought on 13 September 2013 by Cytochroma Development, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 3 July 2013 in Case T-106/12: Cytochroma Development, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013352EN.01000702.xml










30.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/7





Appeal brought on 13 September 2013 by Cytochroma Development, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 3 July 2013 in Case T-106/12: Cytochroma Development, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-490/13 P)
2013/C 352/13
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Cytochroma Development, Inc. (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, A. Smith, Solicitor)

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

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the judgment of the General Court dated 3 July 2013 in Case T-106/12;










—


order OHIM to bear its own costs and pay those of the appellant





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant submits that the contested judgment should be annulled on the following grounds:






—


The General Court infringed Article 65(6) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation (1) and Article 1 (d) (1) of Regulation 216/96 (2) regarding the measures taken by OHIM to comply with the judgment of the General Court;










—


The General Court infringed the principle of legal certainty, as well as Article 17 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark
OJ L 78, p. 1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 216/96 of 5 February 1996 laying down the rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
OJ L 28, p. 11
Notification of the Danish Government pursuant to Article 10(2) of Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ( ‘Gas Directive’ ) concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas regarding the designation of Energinet.dk as transmission system operator in Denmark — Gas TSO
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: Denmark
Subjects: Denmark, domestic market, natural gas, private sector, public contract, transport network








C_2013264EN.01001002.xml










13.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 264/10





Notification of the Danish Government pursuant to Article 10(2) of Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Gas Directive’) concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas regarding the designation of Energinet.dk as transmission system operator in Denmark — Gas TSO
2013/C 264/08
Following the Danish regulatory authority's final decision of 28 February 2012 regarding the certification of Energinet.dk as ownership unbundled transmission system operator (Article 9 of the Gas Directive), Denmark has notified to the Commission the official approval and designation of this company as a transmission system operator operating in Denmark in accordance with Article 10 of the Gas Directive.
Any additional information can be obtained at the following address:
E-mail: ens@ens.dk
http://www.ens.dk
Case T-358/12 P: Order of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Conticchio v Commission (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Pensions — Decision concerning the calculation of pension rights — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European civil service, pension scheme, seniority








C_2013336EN.01002401.xml










16.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 336/24





Order of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Conticchio v Commission
(Case T-358/12 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Decision concerning the calculation of pension rights - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
2013/C 336/50
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Rosella Conticchio (Rome, Italy) (represented by: R. Giuffrida and A. Tortora, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, Agents, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 July 2012 in Case F-22/11 Conticchio v Commission ECR-SC I-A-0000 and II-0000, seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Each party shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 295, 29.9.2012.
Case T-563/11: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Anbouba v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against Syria — Freezing of funds and economic resources — Burden of proof — Manifest error of assessment — Rights of defence — Obligation to state reasons — Procedure by default — Application to intervene — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Syria, capital movement, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, proof, rights of the defence








C_2013313EN.01002403.xml










26.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 313/24





Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Anbouba v Council
(Case T-563/11) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Syria - Freezing of funds and economic resources - Burden of proof - Manifest error of assessment - Rights of defence - Obligation to state reasons - Procedure by default - Application to intervene - No need to adjudicate)
2013/C 313/48
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Issam Anbouba (Homs, Syria) (represented by: M.-A. Bastin, J.-M. Salva and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented: initially by R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro and M.-M. Joséphidès, then R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro and A. Vitro, Agents)

Re:

First, application for annulment of Council Decision 2011/522/CFSP of 2 September 2011 amending Decision 2011/273/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2011 L 228, p. 16), of Council Decision 2011/628/CFSP of 23 September 2011 amending Decision 2011/273/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2011 L 247, p. 17), of Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP of 1 December 2011 concerning restrictive measures against Syria and repealing Decision 2011/273/CFSP (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 56), of Council Regulation (EU) No 878/2011 of 2 September 2011 amending Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2011 L 228, p. 1), and of Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 of 18 January 2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria and repealing Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 (OJ 2012 L 16, p. 1), in so far as the applicant is named in the list of persons subject to the restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, and, second, application for payment of compensation for damage suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the Commission’s application for leave to intervene;










2.


Dismisses the application;










3.


Orders Mr Issam Anbouba to bear his own costs.






(1)  OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
Case T-214/11: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — ClientEarth and PAN Europe v EFSA (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Names of experts who submitted comments on a guidance document relating to the scientific documents to be included in applications for authorisation to place plant protection products and the active substances contained in those products on the market — Refusal of access — Exception concerning protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual — Protection of personal data — Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, data protection, documentation, market approval, personal data, plant health product, protection of privacy, self-employed person








C_2013313EN.01002103.xml










26.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 313/21





Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — ClientEarth and PAN Europe v EFSA
(Case T-214/11) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Names of experts who submitted comments on a guidance document relating to the scientific documents to be included in applications for authorisation to place plant protection products and the active substances contained in those products on the market - Refusal of access - Exception concerning protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual - Protection of personal data - Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 - Obligation to state reasons)
2013/C 313/40
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom) and Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. Kirch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (represented by: D. Detken, Agent)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by P. Oliver, P. Ondrůšek and C. ten Dam, and subsequently by P. Oliver, P. Ondrůšek and B. Martenczuk, Agents)

Re:

Application, initially, for annulment of the EFSA decision of 10 February 2011 refusing an application for access, under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), to certain working documents relating to a guidance document, prepared by EFSA, for the benefit of applicants for authorisation to place plant protection products on the market and, subsequently, for annulment of EFSA’s decision of 12 December 2011 withdrawing the earlier decision and granting the applicants access to all the information requested, except for the names of the external experts who made certain comments on the draft guidance document.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders ClientEarth and Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Commission each to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 179, 18.6.2011.
Case T-536/08: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Huvis v Council (Dumping — Imports of polyester staple fibres originating in South Korea — Maintenance of anti-dumping duties following a partial interim review — Action for annulment — Direct and individual concern — Admissibility — Equal treatment and non-discrimination — Article 9(5) and Article 21(1) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (now Article 9(5) and Article 21(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009))
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: South Korea, anti-dumping measure, equal treatment, import (EU), originating product, polymer








C_2013313EN.01001701.xml










26.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 313/17





Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Huvis v Council
(Case T-536/08) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of polyester staple fibres originating in South Korea - Maintenance of anti-dumping duties following a partial interim review - Action for annulment - Direct and individual concern - Admissibility - Equal treatment and non-discrimination - Article 9(5) and Article 21(1) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (now Article 9(5) and Article 21(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009))
2013/C 313/30
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Huvis Corp. (Seoul, South Korea) (represented: initially by J.-F. Bellis, F. Di Gianni and R. Antonini, and subsequently by J.-F. Bellis, F. Di Gianni and A. Scalini, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, Agents, assisted initially by G. Berrisch and G. Wolf, and subsequently by G. Berrisch, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented: intially by M. França and H. van Vliet, and subsequently by M. França and J.-F. Brakeland, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 893/2008 of 10 September 2008 maintaining the anti-dumping duties on imports of polyester staple fibres originating in Belarus, the People’s Republic of China, Saudi Arabia and Korea following a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ 2008 L 247, p. 1), as regards the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Huvis Corp. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6929 — Lotte Chemical Corporation/Versalis/JV)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: South Korea, chemical industry, economic concentration, merger control, petrochemicals








C_2013264EN.01000201.xml










13.9.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 264/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6929 — Lotte Chemical Corporation/Versalis/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2013/C 264/02
On 31 July 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 32013M6929. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.
Case T-320/10: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Fürstlich Castell’sches Domänenamt v OHIM — Castel Frères (CASTEL) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark CASTEL — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Admissibility — Absolute ground for refusal not put forward before the Board of Appeal — Examination of the facts by OHIM of its own motion — Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_2013313EN.01002002.xml










26.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 313/20





Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Fürstlich Castell’sches Domänenamt v OHIM — Castel Frères (CASTEL)
(Case T-320/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark CASTEL - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Admissibility - Absolute ground for refusal not put forward before the Board of Appeal - Examination of the facts by OHIM of its own motion - Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 313/37
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Fürstlich Castell’sches Domänenamt Albrecht Fürst zu Castell-Castell (Castell, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze, G. Würtenberger and T. Wittmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Castel Frères SAS (Blanquefort, France) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 May 2010 (Case R 962/2009-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Fürstlich Castell’sches Domänenamt Albrecht Fürst zu Castell-Castell and Castel Frères SAS

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 4 May 2010 (Case R 962/2009-2);










2.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Fürstlich Castell’sches Domänenamt Albrecht Fürst zu Castell-Castell;










3.


Orders Castel Frères SAS to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 260, 25.9.2010.