do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-145/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission (Civil service — Article 34(1) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure — Application lodged by fax within the period for bringing proceedings, extended on account of distance by a period of ten days — Application received by post within the following ten days — Applications not the same — Action out of time)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, administrative formalities, disability insurance, incapacity for work








C_2014071EN.01003601.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/36






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case F-145/12)
(Civil service - Article 34(1) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure - Application lodged by fax within the period for bringing proceedings, extended on account of distance by a period of ten days - Application received by post within the following ten days - Applications not the same - Action out of time)
(2014/C 71/71)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s request for the revalorisation of his invalidity pension.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Marcuccio id ordered to bear his own costs.
Case F-127/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission (Civil service — Article 34(1) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure — Application lodged by fax within the period for bringing proceedings, extended on account of distance by a period of ten days — Application received by post within the following ten days — Applications not the same — Action out of time)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, administrative formalities, facsimile, indemnification, job mobility








C_2014071EN.01003502.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/35






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case F-127/12)
(Civil service - Article 34(1) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure - Application lodged by fax within the period for bringing proceedings, extended on account of distance by a period of ten days - Application received by post within the following ten days - Applications not the same - Action out of time)
(2014/C 71/69)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision refusing to pay compensation for the loss suffered by the applicant as a result of the late despatch of the bill of lading relating to the transport of his personal effects from Luanda (Angola), to where he had been assigned, to Italy.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1005/2013 of 17 October 2013 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Emmental français est-central (PGI)]
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, cows’ milk cheese, designation of origin, product designation, soft cheese








L_2013279EN.01005701.xml










19.10.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 279/57








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1005/2013
of 17 October 2013
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Emmental français est-central (PGI)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 repealed and replaced Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (2).












(2)


In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Commission has examined France’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Emmental français est-central’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (3).












(3)


Since the amendments in question are not minor, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (4), as required by Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. As no statement of objection under Article 7 of that Regulation has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name in the Annex to this Regulation are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 17 October 2013.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Dacian CIOLOȘ
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(3)  
            OJ L 148, 21.6.1996, p. 1.

(4)  
            OJ C 352, 16.11.2012, p. 17.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.3.   Cheeses

FRANCE
Emmental français est-central (PGI)
Case C-218/12: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Saarbrücken — Germany) — Lokman Emrek v Vlado Sabranovic (Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 15(1)(c) — Jurisdiction over consumer contracts — Whether jurisdiction limited to distance contracts — Causal link between the commercial or professional activity directed to the Member State of the consumer’s domicile via an Internet site and the conclusion of the contract)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU national, Internet, civil law, commercial law, conflict of jurisdiction, consumer protection, distance selling, interpretation of the law, mutual recognition principle








C_2013367EN.01001402.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/14





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Saarbrücken — Germany) — Lokman Emrek v Vlado Sabranovic
(Case C-218/12) (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 15(1)(c) - Jurisdiction over consumer contracts - Whether jurisdiction limited to distance contracts - Causal link between the commercial or professional activity directed to the Member State of the consumer’s domicile via an Internet site and the conclusion of the contract)
2013/C 367/23
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Saarbrücken

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Lokman Emrek

Defendant: Vlado Sabranovic

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Saarbrücken — Interpretation of Article 15(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Jurisdiction over consumer contracts — Situation in which a trader operates an internet site ‘directed’ towards the Member State in which the consumer is resident — Need for a causal link between that activity and the conclusion of the contract by the consumer — Possible restriction of jurisdiction over consumer contracts to contracts which have been concluded at a distance

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that that it does not require the existence of a causal link between the means employed to direct the commercial or professional activity to the Member State of the consumer’s domicile. However, the existence of such a causal link constitutes evidence of the connection between the contract and such activity.


(1)  OJ C 243, 11.8.2012.
Case T-553/13: Action brought on 17 October 2013 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Joint Undertaking, award of contract, indemnification, information technology, invitation to tender, research and development








C_2013367EN.01003602.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/36





Action brought on 17 October 2013 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Evropaïki Dynamiki v European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy
(Case T-553/13)
2013/C 367/65
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Ettelbrück, Luxembourg); and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: D. Mabger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the defendant’s award decision dated 7 August 2013 in relation to the open Call for Tenders F4E-ADM-0464 (OJ 2012/S 213-352451) for the award of the Framework Service Contract in cascade entitled ‘Provision of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Projects to Fusion for Energy’ (OJ 2013/S 198-342743);










—


Order the defendant to provide the applicants with the compensation of damages for the loss of opportunity to be awarded a contract;










—


Order the defendant to pay the applicants exemplary damages;










—


Order the defendant to pay the applicants’ legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with this application, even if the current application is rejected.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to comply with EU legislation, as it proceeded with the evaluation of tenders and the award of the contract after the expiration of the validity of tenders.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to comply with EU legislation through the infringement of the obligation to state reasons. The defendant provided the applicants with an Evaluation Report which did not contain any concrete evaluation comments concerning the applicants’ tender.
Case C-210/12: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht — Germany) — Sumitomo Chemical Co. Ltd v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (Patent law — Plant protection products — Supplementary protection certificate — Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 — Directive 91/414/EEC — Emergency marketing authorisation under Article 8(4) of that directive)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European patent, interpretation of the law, market approval, patent law, plant health product








C_2013367EN.01001301.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/13





Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundespatentgericht — Germany) — Sumitomo Chemical Co. Ltd v Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt
(Case C-210/12) (1)

(Patent law - Plant protection products - Supplementary protection certificate - Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 - Directive 91/414/EEC - Emergency marketing authorisation under Article 8(4) of that directive)
2013/C 367/21
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundespatentgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Sumitomo Chemical Co. Ltd

Defendant: Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Bundespatentgericht — Interpretation of Articles 3(1)(b) and 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (OJ 1996 L 198, p. 30) — Conditions under which a supplementary certificate can be obtained — Possibility of having that certificate issued on the basis of a prior marketing authorisation granted in accordance with Article 8(4) of Directive 91/414/EEC — Active substance Clothianidin

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1610/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products must be interpreted as precluding the issue of a supplementary protection certificate for a plant protection product in respect of which an emergency marketing authorisation has been issued under Article 8(4) of Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, as amended by Commission Directive 2005/58/EC of 21 September 2005.










2.


Articles 3(1)(b) and 7(1) of Regulation No 1610/96 must be interpreted as precluding an application for a supplementary protection certificate being lodged before the date on which the plant protection product has obtained the marketing authorisation referred to in Article 3(1)(b) of that regulation.






(1)  OJ C 209, 14.7.2012.
Case C-291/12: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Gelsenkirchen (Germany)) — Michael Schwarz v Stadt Bochum (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Biometric passport — Fingerprints — Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 — Article 1(2) — Validity — Legal basis — Procedure for adopting — Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Right to respect for private life — Right to the protection of personal data — Proportionality)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: area of freedom, security and justice, biometrics, data protection, forgery of documents, legal basis, personal data, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy








C_2013367EN.01001702.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/17





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 17 October 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Gelsenkirchen (Germany)) — Michael Schwarz v Stadt Bochum
(Case C-291/12) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Biometric passport - Fingerprints - Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 - Article 1(2) - Validity - Legal basis - Procedure for adopting - Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to respect for private life - Right to the protection of personal data - Proportionality)
2013/C 367/29
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Gelsenkirchen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Michael Schwarz

Defendant: Stadt Bochum

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Verwaltungsgericht Gelsenkirchen — Validity of Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 of 13 December 2004 on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States (OJ 2004 L 385, p. 1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 444/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 (OJ 2009 L 142, p. 1), as amended (OJ 2009 L 188, p. 127), in the light of Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Right of a person to be issued with a passport without his fingerprints being taken

Operative part of the judgment

Examination of the question referred has revealed nothing capable of affecting the validity of Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2252/2004 of 13 December 2004 on standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 444/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009.


(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
Case C-542/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 17 October 2013 — Mohamed M’Bodj v Conseil des ministres
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disabled person, foreign national, health care, health insurance, residence permit, stateless person








C_2013367EN.01002601.xml










14.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/26





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 17 October 2013 — Mohamed M’Bodj v Conseil des ministres
(Case C-542/13)
2013/C 367/47
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour constitutionnelle

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Mohamed M’Bodj

Defendant: Conseil des ministres

Questions referred







1.


Must Articles 2(e) and (f), 15, 18, 28 and 29 of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004‘on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third-country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted’ (1) be interpreted as meaning that not only a person who has been granted, at his request, subsidiary protection status by an independent authority of the Member State must be entitled to benefit from the social welfare and health care referred to in Articles 28 and 29 of that directive, but also a foreign national who has been authorised by an administrative authority of a Member State to reside in the territory of that Member State and who suffers from an illness occasioning a real risk to his life or physical integrity or a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment in the case where there is no appropriate treatment in his country of origin or in the country in which he resides?










2.


If the answer to the first question referred for a preliminary ruling is that the two categories of persons who are there described must be capable of benefiting from the social welfare and health care referred to therein, must Articles 20(3), 28(2) and 29(2) of Directive 2004/83 be interpreted as meaning that the obligation imposed on Member States to take into account the specific situation of vulnerable persons such as disabled people implies that the latter must be granted the allowances provided for by the Law of 27 February 1987 concerning allowances for disabled people, in view of the fact that social assistance which takes account of the handicap may be granted pursuant to the Basic Law of 8 July 1976 on public social welfare centres?






(1)  OJ L 304. p. 12.
Case F-77/12: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — Vasilev v Commission (Civil Service — Open competition — Notice of competition EPSO/AD/208/11 — Lack of availability, at the preliminary test, of a keyboard for the applicant to use to which he was accustomed — Refusal of admission to the assessment tests — Equal treatment)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, admission to examinations, competition (EU), equal treatment








C_2013352EN.01002402.xml










30.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/24





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — Vasilev v Commission
(Case F-77/12) (1)

(Civil Service - Open competition - Notice of competition EPSO/AD/208/11 - Lack of availability, at the preliminary test, of a keyboard for the applicant to use to which he was accustomed - Refusal of admission to the assessment tests - Equal treatment)
2013/C 352/46
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: Vasil Vasilev (Sandanski, Bulgaia) (represented by: R. Nedin, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Eggers and N. Nikolova, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application to annul the decision not to admit the applicant to the assessment tests in competition EPSO/AD/208/11.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Mr Vasilev to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 319, 20.10.2012, p. 18.
Case F-69/11: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — BF v Court of Auditors (Civil service — Procedure for filling the post of director — Report of the pre-selection board — Statement of reasons — None — Unlawfulness of the nomination decision — Conditions)
Date: 2013-10-17
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, appointment of staff, managing director








C_2013352EN.01002301.xml










30.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/23





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 17 October 2013 — BF v Court of Auditors
(Case F-69/11) (1)

(Civil service - Procedure for filling the post of director - Report of the pre-selection board - Statement of reasons - None - Unlawfulness of the nomination decision - Conditions)
2013/C 352/42
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: BF (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Auditors of the European Union (represented by: T. Kennedy and J. Vermer, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck)

Re:

Application to annul the decision of the Court of Auditors not to appoint the applicant to the post of director of the Directorate of Human Resources and to appoint another candidate to that post.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Annuls the decisions of 18 November 2011 by which the Court of Auditors of the European Union appointed Ms Z to the post of Director of Human Resources and rejected BF’s candidacy for that post;










2.


Considers that there is no need to adjudicate on the request of the Court of Auditors of the European Union to remove from the file Annexes A7 and A11 to the application;










3.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










4.


Orders the Court of Auditors of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by BF.






(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011, p. 52.