do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-581/12 P: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 November 2013 — Kuwait Petroleum Corp., Kuwait Petroleum International Ltd, Kuwait Petroleum (Nederland) BV v European Commission (Appeals — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Netherlands market in road pavement bitumen — Setting of the gross price of road pavement bitumen — Setting of a rebate for road builders — 2002 Leniency Notice — Last paragraph of point 23(b) — Partial immunity — Evidence relating to facts previously unknown to the European Commission — Appeal manifestly inadmissible or manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, cartel, discounting, domestic market, fine, fixing of prices, petroleum product, restriction on competition, road building








C_2014102EN.01000502.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/5





Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 21 November 2013 — Kuwait Petroleum Corp., Kuwait Petroleum International Ltd, Kuwait Petroleum (Nederland) BV v European Commission
(Case C-581/12 P) (1)

((Appeals - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Netherlands market in road pavement bitumen - Setting of the gross price of road pavement bitumen - Setting of a rebate for road builders - 2002 Leniency Notice - Last paragraph of point 23(b) - Partial immunity - Evidence relating to facts previously unknown to the European Commission - Appeal manifestly inadmissible or manifestly unfounded))
2014/C 102/06
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Kuwait Petroleum Corp., Kuwait Petroleum International Ltd, Kuwait Petroleum (Nederland) BV (represented by: D. Hull, Solicitor, and G. Berrisch, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Ronkes Agerbeek and P. Van Nuffel, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 27 September 2012 in Case T-370/06 Kuwait Petroleum and Others v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed an action seeking partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 4090 final of 13 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case COMP/F/38.456 — Bitumen (Netherlands)) concerning agreements on the fixing of the gross price of road pavement bitumen in the Netherlands and on the fixing of a uniform minimum rebate for road-builders participating in the cartel and a smaller maximum rebate for other road builders — Reduction of the fine imposed on the appellants.

Operative part of the order

The Court






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Kuwait Petroleum Corp., Kuwait Petroleum International Ltd and Kuwait Petroleum (Nederland) BV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
Case T-313/11: Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2013 — Heede v OHIM (Matrix-Energetics) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark Matrix-Energetics — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Relevant public — Date of the determination of the descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alternative medicine, psychology, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014009EN.01002202.xml










11.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/22





Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2013 — Heede v OHIM (Matrix-Energetics)
(Case T-313/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Matrix-Energetics - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Relevant public - Date of the determination of the descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2014/C 9/35
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Günter Heede (Walldorf-Baden) (represented by: R. Utz, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 April 2011 (Case R 1848/2010-4) concerning the application for registration of the word sign Matrix-Energetics as a Community word mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Günter Heede to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2013340EN.01000201.xml










21.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

20 November 2013
2013/C 340/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3527




JPY


Japanese yen


135,20




DKK


Danish krone


7,4590




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83765




SEK


Swedish krona


8,9195




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2323




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,2280




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,329




HUF


Hungarian forint


296,78




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7029




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1867




RON


Romanian leu


4,4465




TRY


Turkish lira


2,7197




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4418




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4145




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,4857




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6275




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6826




KRW


South Korean won


1 429,66




ZAR


South African rand


13,6817




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2434




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6453




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 571,02




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3021




PHP


Philippine peso


59,088




RUB


Russian rouble


44,4208




THB


Thai baht


42,840




BRL


Brazilian real


3,0705




MXN


Mexican peso


17,5310




INR


Indian rupee


84,5230






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-611/13: Action brought on 21 November 2013 — Australian Gold v OHIM — Effect Management & Holding (HOT)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014024EN.01003401.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/34





Action brought on 21 November 2013 — Australian Gold v OHIM — Effect Management & Holding (HOT)
(Case T-611/13)
2014/C 24/63
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Australian Gold LLC (Indianapolis, United States) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Effect Management & Holding GmbH (Vöcklabruck, Austria)

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 10 September 2013 given in Case R 1881/2012-4;










—


Order the defendant and the other party before the Board of Appeal, should it intervene, to pay the cost of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The figurative mark containing the verbal element ‘HOT’ for goods in Classes 3, 5, 16 and 25 — International registration designating the European Union No 797 277

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The grounds were those laid down in Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b)(c) CTMR

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Granted the application for a declaration of invalidity in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal in part

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(a)(b)(c) and Article 8(3) CTMR.
Case C-595/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 21 November 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: business management, incorporation, investment company, real property








C_2014039EN.01000702.xml










8.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 39/7





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 21 November 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs
(Case C-595/13)
2014/C 39/12
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant in cassation: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Other party: Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a company which has been set up by more than one investor for the sole purpose of investing the assets assembled in immovable property may be regarded as a special investment fund within the meaning of that provision?










2.


If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: is Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive to be interpreted as meaning that the term ‘management’ also covers the actual management of the company’s immovable property, which the company has entrusted to a third party?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).
Case C-594/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 21 November 2013 — ‘go fair’ Zeitarbeit OHG v Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, diploma, gerontology, labour mobility, provision of services, social assistance, temporary employment agency








C_2014071EN.01000303.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/3






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 21 November 2013 — ‘go fair’ Zeitarbeit OHG v Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona
(Case C-594/13)
(2014/C 71/06)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant:‘go fair’Zeitarbeit OHG

Defendant: Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona

Questions referred







1.


On the interpretation of Article 132(1)(g) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax:






(a)


Can a Member State exercise the discretion it enjoys in the context of recognising a body as being devoted to social wellbeing in such a way that, while it recognises persons who provide their services to social security funds and care funds, it does not also recognise State-examined care workers who provide their services directly to persons in need of care?










(b)


If State-examined care workers are to be recognised as being devoted to social wellbeing, does the recognition of a temporary work agency which hires out State-examined care workers to recognised care establishments (host establishments) follow from the recognition of the staff hired out?














2.


On the interpretation of Article 134(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax:
Is the supply of State-examined care workers, as a transaction closely linked to welfare and social security work, essential to the provision of care services to the host establishment (user undertaking), if the host establishment cannot operate without staff?






(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case F-122/12: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 21 November 2013 — Arguelles Arias v Council (Civil Service — Contract staff — Contract for an indefinite period — Termination — Post held requiring security clearance — Clearance refused by the national security authority — Decision varied by the appeal body — Findings of the national security authority and the appeal body not binding on the AECE)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, damages, dismissal, indemnification








C_2014071EN.01003402.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/34






Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 21 November 2013 — Arguelles Arias v Council
(Case F-122/12) (1)

(Civil Service - Contract staff - Contract for an indefinite period - Termination - Post held requiring security clearance - Clearance refused by the national security authority - Decision varied by the appeal body - Findings of the national security authority and the appeal body not binding on the AECE)
(2014/C 71/66)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Bruno Arguelles Arias (Awans, Belgium) (represented by: J. Lecuyer, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and A. Bisch, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the Council dismissing the applicant and for compensation for the material and non-material damage suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Arguelles Arias to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.






(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013, p. 72.
Case T-443/12: Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2013 — Equinix (Germany) v OHIM — Acotel (ancotel.) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark ancotel. — Earlier Community figurative mark ACOTEL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2014009EN.01002301.xml










11.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/23





Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2013 — Equinix (Germany) v OHIM — Acotel (ancotel.)
(Case T-443/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ancotel. - Earlier Community figurative mark ACOTEL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2014/C 9/37
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Equinix (Germany) GmbH, formerly ancotel GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: H. Truelsen, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Acotel SpA (Rome, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 August 2012 (Case R 1895/2011-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Acotel SpA and ancotel GmbH, now Equinix (Germany) GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Equinix (Germany) GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 379, 8.12.2012.
Case C-600/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Matera (Italy) lodged on 21 November 2013 — Intelcom Service Ltd v Vincenzo Mario Marvulli
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, Italy, contract, freedom to provide services, monopoly, notary, provision of services, purchase, real property








C_2014052EN.01002602.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/26





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Matera (Italy) lodged on 21 November 2013 — Intelcom Service Ltd v Vincenzo Mario Marvulli
(Case C-600/13)
2014/C 52/47
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Giudice di pace di Matera

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Intelcom Service Ltd

Defendant: Vincenzo Mario Marvulli

Questions referred







1.


Do Articles 51 et seq. of Italian Law No 89/1913 concerning the profession of notary, in conjunction with Articles 1350 and 2657 of the Civil Code, give rise to a de facto monopoly on the provision of services by notaries with regard to drawing up and authenticating deeds relating to the sale of immovable property in Italy, in clear breach of the rules and principles laid down by the Treaties of the European Union (Article 49 of the EU Treaty), which provide for the free movement of services within the Member States of the European Union, and in particular of Directive 2006/123/EC (1) of 12 December 2006 [on services in the internal market] (referred to as the Bolkestein directive), implemented in Italy by Legislative Decree No 59 of 26 March 2010 and published in G.U. No 94 of 23 April 2010?










2.


Does the Court of Justice of the European Union also consider Italian Law No 89/1913 concerning the profession of notary, in conjunction with Articles 1350 and 2657 of the Civil Code, to be in breach of the rules laid down by the EU Treaty which prohibit monopolies on the provision of services (Article 53 of the EU Treaty and Article 37 of the EU Treaty)?










3.


Does the Court of Justice of the European Union also consider Italian Law No 89/1913 concerning the profession of notary, in conjunction with Articles 1350 and 2657 of the Civil Code, to be in breach of European Union rules prohibiting what are referred to as measures having equivalent effect, laid down in Articles 28 and 29 of the EC Treaty and subsequently included in Articles 34 and 35 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as a result of the reform brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon, such measures being prohibited by the Treaty since they treat nationals of some Member States less favourably than nationals of other Member States with regard to access to services?






(1)  Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 36).
Case T-610/13: Action brought on 21 November 2013 — Ecolab USA/OHMI (GREASECUTTER)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014024EN.01003303.xml










25.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/33





Action brought on 21 November 2013 — Ecolab USA/OHMI (GREASECUTTER)
(Case T-610/13)
2014/C 24/62
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ecolab USA (St. Paul, United States) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt and V. Töbelmann, lawyers)

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

Form of order sought

The appellant requests the Court to decide as follows:






—


The decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for the Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 September 2013 (Case R 1704/2012-2) is overturned insofar as the EU-designation of International registration no. 1103198 GREASECUTTER is rejected.










—


The defendant shall bear its own costs as well as the costs of the plaintiff.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘GREASECUTTER’ for goods in Classes 3 and 5 — International Registration No W 1103198

Decision of the Examiner: Refused protection of the International Registration designating the European Union

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-524/12: Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2013 — Recaro v OHIM — Certino Mode (RECARO) (Community trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Community word mark RECARO — Genuine use of the mark — Article 15(15)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Nature of the use of the mark — Admissibility of new evidence — Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2013-11-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vehicle parts








C_2014009EN.01002302.xml










11.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/23





Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2013 — Recaro v OHIM — Certino Mode (RECARO)
(Case T-524/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community word mark RECARO - Genuine use of the mark - Article 15(15)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Nature of the use of the mark - Admissibility of new evidence - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
2014/C 9/38
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Recaro Holding GmbH, formerly Recaro Beteiligungs-GmbH (Stuttgart (Germany)) (represented by: J. Weiser, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Certino Mode SL (Elche (Spain))

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 September 2012 (Case R 1761/2011-1) relating to revocation proceedings between Recaro Beteiligungs-GmbH and Certino Mode SL

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Recaro Holding GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 2.2.2013.