do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-22/12: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Hall v Commission and CEPOL (Civil service — Remuneration — Family allowances — Dependent child allowance — Education allowance — Children of applicant’s wife not living at the home of the couple — Conditions for granting)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, care allowance, education grant, pay








C_2014039EN.01002801.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 — Hall v Commission and CEPOL
(Case F-22/12) (1)

(Civil service - Remuneration - Family allowances - Dependent child allowance - Education allowance - Children of applicant’s wife not living at the home of the couple - Conditions for granting)
2014/C 39/50
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Mark Hall (Petersfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, Agents) and European Police College (CEPOL) (represented by: F. Bánfi, Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decisions rejecting the applicant’s request for the grant of dependent child and education allowances in respect of his wife’s three children for the period in which they were still living in the Philippines.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action as inadmissible, in so far as it is directed against the European Police College;










2.


Annuls the implied decision of 25 March 2011 and the express decision of 11 July 2011 of the European Commission rejecting the application for dependent child and education allowances for the three children of Mr Hall’s wife, for the period in which they were still living in the Philippines;










3.


Dismisses the remainder of the action brought against the European Commission;










4.


Declares that the European Commission is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs incurred by Mr Hall;










5.


Orders Mr Hall to pay the costs incurred by the European Police College.






(1)  OJ C 138, 12.5.2012, p. 35.
Case T-651/13: Action brought on 12 December 2013 — Time v OHIM (InStyle)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, communications industry, registered trade mark, serial publication, trade-mark law








C_2014061EN.01001002.xml










1.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 61/10





Action brought on 12 December 2013 — Time v OHIM (InStyle)
(Case T-651/13)
2014/C 61/17
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Time Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: D. Cañadas Arcas, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 20 September 2013 given in Case R 827/2013-2;










—


Order the defendant to bear the costs of proceedings, including the costs of the appeal proceeding incurred before the Office.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The figurative trade mark for goods and services in Classes 9, 16 and 41 — Community trade mark application No 11 264 223

Decision of the Examiner: Rejected partially the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) CTMR.
Case F-58/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission (Civil service — Decision to retire an official on grounds of invalidity — Annulment by the Tribunal on the ground of failure to state reasons — Request for implementation of the judgment — Request for reinstatement — Judgment of the Tribunal set aside — No interest in bringing proceedings — Article 266 TEU — Non-contractual liability of the institution — Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, contractual liability, damages, disability insurance, indemnification, retirement conditions








C_2014031EN.01002003.xml










1.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 31/20





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case F-58/12) (1)

(Civil service - Decision to retire an official on grounds of invalidity - Annulment by the Tribunal on the ground of failure to state reasons - Request for implementation of the judgment - Request for reinstatement - Judgment of the Tribunal set aside - No interest in bringing proceedings - Article 266 TEU - Non-contractual liability of the institution - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
2014/C 31/35
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s implied decision refusing the applicant’s request to implement the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 4 November 2008 in Case F-41/06 Marcuccio v Commission and, on that basis, assignment of the applicant to duties relating to a post in the function group corresponding to the former’s grade and an application for damages.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.










2.


Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 295, 29.09.2012, p. 33.
Case C-355/13: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Regionale dell’Umbria — Italy) — Umbra Packaging srl v Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale di Perugia (Request for a preliminary ruling — Rules of Procedure — Articles 53(2) and 99 — Possible to infer the answer to a question referred for a preliminary ruling clearly from the case-law — Request manifestly inadmissible — Electronic communications networks and services — Directive 2002/20/EC (Authorisation Directive) — Article 3 — Imposition of a government authorisation charge when a telephone subscription is taken out — Charge not applied to the use of prepaid telephone cards — Article 102 TFEU)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: case-law (EU), mobile phone, tax, transmission network








C_2014052EN.01002401.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/24





Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 December 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Regionale dell’Umbria — Italy) — Umbra Packaging srl v Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale di Perugia
(Case C-355/13) (1)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Rules of Procedure - Articles 53(2) and 99 - Possible to infer the answer to a question referred for a preliminary ruling clearly from the case-law - Request manifestly inadmissible - Electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/20/EC (Authorisation Directive) - Article 3 - Imposition of a government authorisation charge when a telephone subscription is taken out - Charge not applied to the use of prepaid telephone cards - Article 102 TFEU)
2014/C 52/42
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione Tributaria Regionale dell’Umbria

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Umbra Packaging srl

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale di Perugia

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Commissione Tributaria Regionale dell’Umbria — Interpretation of Article 3 of Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 21) and of Article 102 TFEU — National legislation imposing a fee on mobile telephone operators — Imposition of a government authorisation charge when a telephone subscription is taken out — Charge not applied to the use of prepaid telephone cards

Operative part of the order

Article 3 of Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive), must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude national legislation such as that relating to the charge on activities carried out in the context of a government concession.


(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.
Case F-133/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Non-contractual liability of the European Union — Compensation for the damage resulting from the fact that a letter was sent by the institution to the applicant’s lawyer concerning costs the applicant had been ordered to pay — Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded — Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, electronic mail, indemnification, legal expenses








C_2014071EN.01003503.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/35






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 12 December 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission
(Case F-133/12)
(Civil service - Officials - Non-contractual liability of the European Union - Compensation for the damage resulting from the fact that a letter was sent by the institution to the applicant’s lawyer concerning costs the applicant had been ordered to pay - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded - Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure)
(2014/C 71/70)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser, G. Gattinara, Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s request for compensation for the fact that a letter concerning the applicant was sent by the defendant to the applicant’s lawyer, and a claim for damages.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded.










2.


Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.










3.


Mr Marcuccio is ordered to pay to the Tribunal the sum of EUR 2 000.
Case T-574/11: Order of the General Court of 12 December 2013 — Unipol Banca v OHIM — Union Investment Privatfonds (unicard)
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic banking, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014045EN.01004401.xml










15.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/44





Order of the General Court of 12 December 2013 — Unipol Banca v OHIM — Union Investment Privatfonds (unicard)
(Case T-574/11) (1)

2014/C 45/75
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.
Case C-655/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Nederland) lodged on 12 December 2013 — H.J. Mertens v Raad van bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen
Date: 2013-12-12
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: frontier worker, part-time employment, short-time working








C_2014078EN.01000301.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/3





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Nederland) lodged on 12 December 2013 — H.J. Mertens v Raad van bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen
(Case C-655/13)
2014/C 78/05
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: H.J. Mertens

Defendant: Raad van bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen

Question referred

Should Article 71(1)(a)(i) of Regulation No 1408/71 (1) be interpreted as precluding a frontier worker who, immediately after a full-time employment relationship with an employer in a Member State, is employed for fewer hours by another employer in the same Member State, from being classified as a partially unemployed frontier worker?


(1)  Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community (OJ 1971 L 149, p. 2 [DE, FR, IT, NL]; English special edition: Series I Volume 1971(II) P. 416-463).