do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-304/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Message Management v OHIM — Absacker (ABSACKER of Germany) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark ABSACKER of Germany — Earlier national figurative mark ABSACKER — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beverage industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014052EN.01003501.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/35





Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Message Management v OHIM — Absacker (ABSACKER of Germany)
(Case T-304/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ABSACKER of Germany - Earlier national figurative mark ABSACKER - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2014/C 52/64
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Message Management GmbH (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: C. Konle, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Absacker GmbH (Cologne, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 March 2012 (case R 1028/2011-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Absacker GmbH and Message Management GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Message Management GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
Case C-429/12: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Innsbruck — Austria) — Siegfried Pohl v ÖBB-Infrastruktur AG (Request for a preliminary ruling — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 45 TFEU — Directive 2000/78/EC — Difference in treatment on grounds of age — Determination of the reference date for the purposes of advancement on the salary scale — Limitation period — Principle of effectiveness)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU employment policy, age discrimination, equal treatment, pay scale, promotion, rail transport, transport company








C_2014085EN.01000801.xml










22.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 85/8





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Innsbruck — Austria) — Siegfried Pohl v ÖBB-Infrastruktur AG
(Case C-429/12) (1)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 45 TFEU - Directive 2000/78/EC - Difference in treatment on grounds of age - Determination of the reference date for the purposes of advancement on the salary scale - Limitation period - Principle of effectiveness)
2014/C 85/13
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Innsbruck

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Siegfried Pohl

Defendant: ÖBB-Infrastruktur AG

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Oberlandesgericht Innsbruck — Interpretation of Article 6(3) TEU, Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 45 TFEU and Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16) — Temporal scope — Period before accession — Remuneration of employees in the rail transport sector — National legislation and collective agreement excluding the taking into account of periods of employment completed before reaching the age of 18 for the purpose of determining remuneration — Taking into account of half of the employee’s periods of employment completed after reaching the age of 18, except in the case of professional experience acquired with a ‘quasi-public’ national undertaking or with the national railway company — Limitation period.

Operative part of the judgment

European Union law, and, in particular, the principle of effectiveness, does not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, making the right of an employee to seek a reassessment of the periods of service which must be taken into account in order to fix the reference date for the purposes of advancement subject to a 30-year limitation period, which starts to run from the conclusion of the agreement on the basis of which that reference date was fixed or from the classification in an incorrect salary scale.


(1)  OJ C 9, 12.1.2013.
Case C-300/12: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)) — Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mitte v Ibero Tours GmbH (Value-added tax — Operations of travel agents — Granting of price discounts to customers — Determination of the taxable amount for services provided as part of an intermediary activity)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, discount sale, provision of services, trade intermediary, travel agency








C_2014085EN.01000402.xml










22.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 85/4





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)) — Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mitte v Ibero Tours GmbH
(Case C-300/12) (1)

(Value-added tax - Operations of travel agents - Granting of price discounts to customers - Determination of the taxable amount for services provided as part of an intermediary activity)
2014/C 85/07
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mitte

Defendant: Ibero Tours GmbH

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Article 11(C)(1) and Article 26 of Directive 77/388/EEC: Sixth Council Directive 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 L 145, p. 1) — Operations of travel agents — Granting of price discounts to customers resulting in a reduction of the travel agent’s commission — Determination of the taxable amount for the intermediary service.

Operative part of the judgment

The provisions of 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, must be interpreted as meaning that the principles established by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-317/94 Elida Gibbs [1996] ECR I-5339 concerning the determination of the taxable amount for VAT purposes do not apply when a travel agent, acting as an intermediary, grants to the final consumer, on the travel agent’s own initiative and at his own expense, a price reduction on the principal service provided by the tour operator.


(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014012EN.01000201.xml










16.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 12/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

15 January 2014
2014/C 12/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3606




JPY


Japanese yen


141,86




DKK


Danish krone


7,4620




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83020




SEK


Swedish krona


8,7955




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2354




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,3185




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,441




HUF


Hungarian forint


300,36




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1575




RON


Romanian leu


4,5234




TRY


Turkish lira


2,9858




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5263




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4905




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,5504




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6280




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7311




KRW


South Korean won


1 446,26




ZAR


South African rand


14,8468




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2263




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6215




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 442,91




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4713




PHP


Philippine peso


61,356




RUB


Russian rouble


45,5004




THB


Thai baht


44,689




BRL


Brazilian real


3,1916




MXN


Mexican peso


17,8443




INR


Indian rupee


83,7358






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-193/13 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 January 2014 — nfon AG v Fon Wireless Ltd, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Figurative mark including the word element ‘nfon’  — Opposition by the proprietor of Community figurative mark including the word element ‘fon’ and of the national word mark FON — Rejection of the opposition by the Board of Appeal of OHIM)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2014112EN.01001902.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/19





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 January 2014 — nfon AG v Fon Wireless Ltd, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-193/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Figurative mark including the word element ‘nfon’ - Opposition by the proprietor of Community figurative mark including the word element ‘fon’ and of the national word mark FON - Rejection of the opposition by the Board of Appeal of OHIM))
2014/C 112/23
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: nfon AG (represented by: V. von Bomhard, Rechtsanwältin)

Other parties to the proceedings: Fon Wireless Ltd (represented by: L Montoya Terán, abogada; Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 January 2013 in Case T-283/11 Fon Wireless v OHIM — Nfon (Nfon), by which the General Court altered the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009 4) to the effect that nfon AG’s appeal to the Board of Appeal is dismissed — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


nfon AG shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Fon Wireless AG.










3.


The Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 189, 29.6.2013.
Case C-226/12: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Oviedo — Spain) — Constructora Principado SA v José Ignacio Menéndez Álvarez (Directive 93/13/EEC — Consumer contracts — Contract for the purchase of immovable property — Unfair terms — Criteria for assessment)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, purchase, real property, unfair terms of contract








C_2014085EN.01000302.xml










22.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 85/3





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 January 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Oviedo — Spain) — Constructora Principado SA v José Ignacio Menéndez Álvarez
(Case C-226/12) (1)

(Directive 93/13/EEC - Consumer contracts - Contract for the purchase of immovable property - Unfair terms - Criteria for assessment)
2014/C 85/05
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Oviedo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Constructora Principado SA

Defendant: José Ignacio Menéndez Álvarez

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Audiencia Provincial de Oviedo — Interpretation of Article 3(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29) — Concept of significant imbalance — Criteria to be taken into account.

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 3(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that:






—


the existence of a ‘significant imbalance’ does not necessarily require that the costs charged to the consumer by a contractual term have, as regards that consumer, a significant economic impact having regard to the value of the transaction in question, but can result solely from a sufficiently serious impairment of the legal situation in which that consumer, as a party to the contract, is placed by reason of the relevant national provisions, whether this be in the form of a restriction of the rights which, in accordance with those provisions, he enjoys under that contract, or a constraint on the exercise of those rights, or the imposition on him of an additional obligation not envisaged by the national rules;










—


in assessing whether there is a significant imbalance, it is for the referring court to take into account the nature of the goods or services for which the contract was concluded by referring to all the circumstances attending the conclusion of that contract, as well as all the other terms of the contract.






(1)  OJ C 227, 28.7.2012.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 839/2012 of 18 September 2012 concerning the authorisation of urea as a feed additive for ruminants ( OJ L 252, 19.9.2012 )
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: animal feedingstuffs, cattle, food safety, food supplement, labelling, market approval








L_2014011EN.01001101.xml










16.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 11/11







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 839/2012 of 18 September 2012 concerning the authorisation of urea as a feed additive for ruminants
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 252 of 19 September 2012
)

On page 13, in the fourth column of the Annex, under the heading ‘Characterisation of the active substance:’:
for:

               ‘CAS number 58069-82-2’,
read:

               ‘CAS number 57-13-6’.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: State aid, Sweden, control of State aid, regional development








C_2014012EN.01000101.xml










16.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 12/1





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 12/01







Date of adoption of the decision


10.12.2013




Reference number of State Aid


SA.37481 (13/N)




Member State


Sweden




Region


—


Article 107(3)(c)




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Förlängning av den godkända statliga stödordningen N 152/07 (regional transportstödordning)




Legal basis


Förordning om ändring i förordningen (2000:281) om regionalt transportbidrag (Decree on amendments of the decree 2000:281 on regional transport aid).




Type of measure


Scheme


—




Objective


Regional development




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget








 


Overall budget: SEK 224 432 000










 


Annual budget: SEK 224 432 000








Intensity


—




Duration (period)


1.1.2014-30.6.2014




Economic sectors


All economic sectors eligible to receive aid




Name and address of the granting authority







Tillväxtverket (Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth)




Box 4404




SE-102 61 Stockholm




SVERIGE








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.7074 — JSR/MOL/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, petrochemicals, rubber industry








C_2014012EN.01000401.xml










16.1.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 12/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.7074 — JSR/MOL/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 12/04






1.


On 9 January 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration, pursuant to a referral within the meaning of Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1), by which JSR Corporation (‘JSR’, Japan) and MOL Hungarian Oil and Gas Company Plc (‘MOL’, Hungary) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control over Vierium Investment Zrt (‘Vierium’, Hungary), by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


JSR: active worldwide in the field of production and sale of petrochemical products, namely elastomers and plastics, and fine chemical materials, such as semiconductor materials, biomedical materials, optical materials, materials used in the production of liquid crystal displays, high performance material used in the environment and energy sector, etc,










—


MOL: active mainly in the EEA in the field of exploration, production and refining of crude oil; distribution of refined oil products both at wholesale and retail level; petrochemicals; and exploration, production and transmission of natural gas,










—


Vierium: will be active in the production of a synthetic rubber, namely solution polymerised styrene butadiene rubber (S-SBR).














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.7074 — JSR/MOL/JV, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).
Case T-538/12: Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Optilingua v OHIM — Esposito (ALPHATRAD) (Community trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Community figurative mark — Genuine use of the mark — Extent of the use — Second subparagraph of Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, translation








C_2014052EN.01003603.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/36





Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Optilingua v OHIM — Esposito (ALPHATRAD)
(Case T-538/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community figurative mark - Genuine use of the mark - Extent of the use - Second subparagraph of Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2014/C 52/69
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Optilingua Holding SA (Épalingues, Switzerland) (represented by: S. Rizzo, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Pétrequin and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Michele Esposito (Cava de' Tirreni, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 October 2012 (Case R 444/2011-1) relating to revocation proceedings between Mr Michele Esposito and Optilingua Holding SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Optilingua Holding SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 38, 9.2.2013.
Case T-528/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Aloe Vera of America v OHIM — Detimos (FOREVER) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark FOREVER — Earlier national figurative mark 4 EVER — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-01-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, distributor, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014052EN.01003302.xml










22.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 52/33





Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Aloe Vera of America v OHIM — Detimos (FOREVER)
(Case T-528/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark FOREVER - Earlier national figurative mark 4 EVER - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009)
2014/C 52/60
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Aloe Vera of America, Inc. (Dallas, Texas, United States) (represented by: R. Niebel and F. Kerl, lawyers)

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, intervener before the General Court: Detimos — Gestão Imobiliária, SA (Carregado, Portugal) (represented by: V. Caires Soares, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 August 2011 (Case R 742/2010-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Diviril — Distribuidora de Viveres do Ribatejo, Lda and Aloe Vera of America, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Aloe Vera of America, Inc. to pay the costs, including those incurred by Detimos — Gestão Imobiliária, SA in the course of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).






(1)  OJ C 362, 10.12.2011.