do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-171/08: Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2013 — Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung v Commission (European Refugee Fund — Action to raise awareness and disseminate information concerning refugees who are victims of psychological trauma — ‘Traumatised refugees in the European Union: institutions, protection mechanisms and good practice’ project — Payment of the balance — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of sound administration — Error of assessment)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, dissemination of information, help for victims, public awareness campaign, refugee








C_2014039EN.01001501.xml










8.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 39/15





Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2013 — Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung v Commission
(Case T-171/08) (1)

(European Refugee Fund - Action to raise awareness and disseminate information concerning refugees who are victims of psychological trauma - ‘Traumatised refugees in the European Union: institutions, protection mechanisms and good practice’ project - Payment of the balance - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of sound administration - Error of assessment)
2014/C 39/24
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: initially U. Claus, then C. Otto, S. Reichmann and L.-J. Schmidt, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially S. Grünheid and B. Simon, then S. Grünheid, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision, enclosed in the letter of 7 March 2008, concerning the Commission’s partial non-recognition of the costs incurred by the applicant in the context of Grant Agreement JAI/2004/ERF/073 relating to Community financing of an action to raise awareness and disseminate information concerning refugees who are victims of psychological trauma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismissses the application;










2.


Orders the Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 171, 5.7.2008.
Case C-656/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 12 December 2013 — L v M, R and K
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, judicial proceedings, jurisdiction, mutual recognition principle, parental responsibility








C_2014085EN.01001101.xml










22.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 85/11





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 12 December 2013 — L v M, R and K
(Case C-656/13)
2014/C 85/19
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší soud České republiky

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: L

Other parties to the proceedings: M; R and K

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 12(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, (‘the Brussels IIa Regulation’) be interpreted as establishing jurisdiction over proceedings concerning parental responsibility even where no other related proceedings (that is, ‘proceedings other than those referred to in paragraph 1’) are pending?




In the event of an affirmative answer to Question 1:






2.


Must Article 12(3) of the Brussels IIa Regulation be interpreted as meaning that acceptance expressly or otherwise in an unequivocal manner includes also the situation in which the party who has not initiated proceedings makes a separate application for the initiation of proceedings in the same case but immediately on doing the first act required of him objects that the court lacks jurisdiction in the proceedings previously started on the application by the other party?






(1)  OJ 2003 L 388, p. 1.
Case T-662/13: Action brought on 12 December 2013 — dm-drogerie markt v OHIM — Diseños Mireia (D and M)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetics industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014061EN.01001201.xml










1.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 61/12





Action brought on 12 December 2013 — dm-drogerie markt v OHIM — Diseños Mireia (D and M)
(Case T-662/13)
2014/C 61/21
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG (Karlsruhe, Germany) (represented by: O. Bludovsky and C. Mellein, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Diseños Mireia, SL (Barcelona, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 September 2013 given in Case R 911/2012-1 and cancel the contested trade mark;










—


Alternatively: Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 September 2013 given in Case R 911/2012-1 and remit the case;










—


Alternatively: Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 September 2013 given in Case R 911/2012-1.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark consisting of the letters ‘D’ and ‘M’ for goods in Class 14 — Community trade mark application No 9 737 917

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The Community trade mark registration No 3 984 044 for the word mark ‘dm’ for goods in Class 14

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8 (1) (b) CTMR
Case T-660/13: Action brought on 12 December 2013 — Czech Republic v European Commission
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU competence, carriage of goods, commercial vehicle, data collection, dissemination of information, information system, parking area, transport safety








C_2014045EN.01004101.xml










15.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/41





Action brought on 12 December 2013 — Czech Republic v European Commission
(Case T-660/13)
2014/C 45/71
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul in its entirety Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 886/2013 of 15 May 2013 supplementing Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to data and procedures for the provision, where possible, of road safety-related minimum universal traffic information free of charge to users (OJ 2013 L 247, p. 6) and










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.




In the alternative, the applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Article 5(1), Article 9 and Article 10(1)(a) of the contested regulation, and










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on 3 pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 7(1) of Directive No 2010/40/EU (1) in conjunction with Article 5(1) and Article 6 thereof
In this connection, the applicant states that the Commission, by adopting the contested regulation, exceeded the limits of the authority laid down by Article 7(1) of Directive No 2010/40, in conjunction with Article 5(1) and Article 6 thereof.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 209 TFEU
In this plea, the applicant claims that the Commission, by the adoption of the contested regulation, exceeded its delegated power to adopt non-legislative acts pursuant to Article 290 TFEU.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 13(2) TEU
In this regard, the applicant submits that the Commission, by the adoption of the contested regulation, exceeded the limits of the powers conferred on it in the Treaties.






(1)  Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport (OJ 2010 L 207, p. 1).
European Parliament legislative resolution of 12 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directives 2006/112/EC and 2008/118/EC as regards the French outermost regions and Mayotte in particular (COM(2013)0577 — C7-0268/2013 — 2013/0280(CNS))
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, Committee on Legal Affairs, Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: France, Mayotte, application of EU law, peripheral region, tax law








C_2016468EN.01033301.xml










15.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 468/333





P7_TA(2013)0582
Amending certain Directives as regards the French outermost regions and Mayotte in particular *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 12 December 2013 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directives 2006/112/EC and 2008/118/EC as regards the French outermost regions and Mayotte in particular (COM(2013)0577 — C7-0268/2013 — 2013/0280(CNS))
(Special legislative procedure — consultation)
(2016/C 468/77)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2013)0577),










—


having regard to Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0268/2013),










—


having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposed legal basis,










—


having regard to Rules 55, 46(1) and 37 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A7-0405/2013),










1.


Approves the Commission proposal;










2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;










3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;










4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1344/2013 of 12 December 2013 establishing a prohibition of fishing for mackerel in area IVa by vessels flying the flag of the United Kingdom
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU waters, North Sea, United Kingdom, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing, ship's flag








L_2013338EN.01002301.xml










17.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 338/23








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1344/2013
of 12 December 2013
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for mackerel in area IVa by vessels flying the flag of the United Kingdom


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Council Regulation (EU) No 40/2013 of 21 January 2013 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and, to EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements (2), lays down quotas for 2013.












(2)


According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2013.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein for 2013 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.


Article 2

Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.


Article 3

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 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, 12 December 2013.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Lowri EVANS
            

Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 23, 25.1.2013, p. 54.




ANNEX






No


73/TQ40




Member State


United Kingdom




Stock


MAC/*4A




Species


Mackerel (Scomber scombrus)




Zone


IVa




Closing date


27.11.2013
Case C-411/12: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — European Commission v Italian Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — State aid — Preferential electricity tariff — Decision 2011/746/EU — Aid incompatible with the internal market — Recovery — Failure to implement within the prescribed period)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Italy, State aid, common market, control of State aid, electrical energy, infringement of EU law, preferential price, reimbursement of aid








C_2014052EN.01001701.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/17





Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — European Commission v Italian Republic
(Case C-411/12) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - State aid - Preferential electricity tariff - Decision 2011/746/EU - Aid incompatible with the internal market - Recovery - Failure to implement within the prescribed period)
2014/C 52/27
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky, D. Grespan and S. Thomas, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, assisted by S. Fiorentino, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — State aid — Failure to adopt the measures necessary to comply with Articles 3, 4 and 5 of Commission Decision 2011/746/EU of 23 February 2011 on State aid granted by Italy to Portovesme Srl, ILA SpA, Eurallumina SpA and Syndial SpA (OJ 2011 L 309, p. 1) — Obligation to recover without delay the aid declared unlawful and incompatible with the common market and to notify the Commission of the measures taken.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by not taking, within the prescribed period, all the measures necessary to recover from Portovesme Srl and Eurallumina SpA the State aid declared unlawful and incompatible with the internal market in Article 2 of Commission Decision 2011/746/EU of 23 February 2011 on State aid measures C 38/B/04 (ex NN 58/04) and C 13/06 (ex N 587/05) granted by Italy to Portovesme Srl, ILA SpA, Eurallumina SpA and Syndial SpA, the Italian Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 3 and 4 of that decision.










2.


Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 355, 17.11.2012.
Case F-68/12: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Lebedef v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Staff report — 2010 appraisal procedure — Application for annulment of staff report — Application for annulment of number of promotion points awarded)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, promotion, staff assessment








C_2014039EN.01002802.xml










8.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 39/28





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Lebedef v Commission
(Case F-68/12) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Staff report - 2010 appraisal procedure - Application for annulment of staff report - Application for annulment of number of promotion points awarded)
2014/C 39/51
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Giorgio Lebedef (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application for annulment of promotion points awarded to the applicant and his staff report for the period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2010.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


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






(1)  OJ C 258, 25.8.2012, p. 28.
Case C-445/12 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Rivella International AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas (Appeal — Community trade mark — Figurative mark containing the word element ‘BASKAYA’ — Opposition — Bilateral convention — Territory of a non-Member State — ‘Genuine use’ )
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, Germany, beverage industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014052EN.01001901.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/19





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Rivella International AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas
(Case C-445/12 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Figurative mark containing the word element ‘BASKAYA’ - Opposition - Bilateral convention - Territory of a non-Member State - ‘Genuine use’)
2014/C 52/31
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Rivella International AG (represented by: C. Spintig, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent), Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of 12 July 2012 in Case T-170/11 Rivella International v OHIM — Baskaya di Baskaya Alim (BASKAYA) by which the General Court (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 January 2011 (Case R 534/2010-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Rivella International AG and Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas — Likelihood of confusion between a figurative sign containing the word element ‘BASKAYA’ and an earlier international figurative mark containing the word element ‘Passaia’ — Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Error of assessment in examining the opposition.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Rivella International AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 366, 24.11.12
Case C-450/12: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 12 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — HARK GmbH & Co KG Kamin- und Kachelofenbau v Hauptzollamt Duisburg (Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Headings 7307 and 7321 — Stove pipe sets — Notions of ‘parts’ of stoves and ‘tube or pipe fittings’ )
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, common customs tariff, heating, piping








C_2014045EN.01001301.xml










15.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/13





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 12 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — HARK GmbH & Co KG Kamin- und Kachelofenbau v Hauptzollamt Duisburg
(Case C-450/12) (1)

(Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Headings 7307 and 7321 - Stove pipe sets - Notions of ‘parts’ of stoves and ‘tube or pipe fittings’)
2014/C 45/22
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: HARK GmbH & Co KG Kamin- und Kachelofenbau

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Duisburg

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1031/2008 of 19 September 2008 (OJ 2008 L 291, p. 1) — Interpretation of headings 7307 and 7321 — Classification of stove pipe sets.

Operative part of the judgment

The Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1031/2008 of 19 September 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that a stove pipe set, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which comprises a right-angled tubular elbow component in steel with an external diameter of 154 mm and external dimensions of 495 mm x 595 mm, which is covered in heat-resistant paint and has a closing flap to allow internal cleaning, a chimney connection and an appropriate surround, must be classified under Combined Nomenclature heading 7321 as a part, in steel, of a stove.


(1)  OJ C 389, 15.12.2012.
Special Report No 11/2013 ‘Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focussed approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification’
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: European Commission, Member States' contribution, financial control, national income








C_2013362EN.01000201.xml










12.12.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 362/2





Special Report No 11/2013 ‘Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focussed approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification’
(2013/C 362/02)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 11/2013 ‘Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focussed approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://eca.europa.eu
A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:





European Court of Auditors




Unit ‘Audit: Production of Reports’




12, rue Alcide de Gasperi




1615 Luxembourg




LUXEMBOURG




Tel. +352 4398-1




E-mail: eca-info@eca.europa.eu




or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.