do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-658/11: Order of the General Court of 27 January 2014 — Commission v OHIM — Ten ewiv (TEN)
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, database, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014078EN.01001801.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/18





Order of the General Court of 27 January 2014 — Commission v OHIM — Ten ewiv (TEN)
(Case T-658/11) (1)

2014/C 78/35
Language of the case: German
The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
Case C-38/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco (Spain) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Subdelegación del Gobierno en Gipuzkoa — Extranjería v Samir Zaizoune
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: economic sanctions, foreign national, illegal migration, removal








C_2014093EN.01002001.xml










29.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/20





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco (Spain) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Subdelegación del Gobierno en Gipuzkoa — Extranjería v Samir Zaizoune
(Case C-38/14)
2014/C 93/32
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Subdelegación del Gobierno en Gipuzkoa — Extranjería

Other party: Samir Zaizoune

Question referred

In the light of the principles of sincere cooperation and the effectiveness of directives, must Articles 4(2), 4(3) and 6(1) of Directive 2008/115/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that they preclude legislation, such as the national legislation at issue in the main proceedings and the case-law which interprets it, pursuant to which the illegal stay of a foreign national may be punishable just by a financial penalty, which, moreover, may not be imposed concurrently with the penalty of removal?


(1)  Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98).
Case C-41/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de Cassation (France) lodged on 27 January 2014  — Christie’s France SNC v Syndicat National des Antiquaires
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: artist's resale right, sale, work of art








C_2014102EN.01002001.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/20





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de Cassation (France) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Christie’s France SNC v Syndicat National des Antiquaires
(Case C-41/14)
2014/C 102/28
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de Cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Christie’s France SNC

Defendant: Syndicat National des Antiquaires

Question referred

Must the rule laid down by Article 1(4) of Directive 2001/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2001 on the resale right for the benefit of the author of an original work of art, (1) which makes the seller responsible for payment of the royalty, be interpreted as meaning that the seller is required definitively to bear the cost thereof without any derogation by agreement’s being possible?


(1)  OJ 2001 L 272, p. 32.
Case T-659/11: Order of the General Court of 27 January 2014 — Commission v OHIM — European Alliance for Solutions and Innovations (EASI European Alliance Solutions Innovations)
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, logistics, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014078EN.01001802.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/18





Order of the General Court of 27 January 2014 — Commission v OHIM — European Alliance for Solutions and Innovations (EASI European Alliance Solutions Innovations)
(Case T-659/11) (1)

2014/C 78/36
Language of the case: German
The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 58, 25.2.2012.
Case T-62/14: Action brought on 27 January 2014 — BR IP Holder v OHIM — Greyleg Investments (HOKEY POKEY)
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, confectionery, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014142EN.01003502.xml










12.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/35





Action brought on 27 January 2014 — BR IP Holder v OHIM — Greyleg Investments (HOKEY POKEY)
(Case T-62/14)
2014/C 142/46
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: BR IP Holder LLC (Canton, United States) (represented by: F. Traub, lawyer, and C. Rohsler, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Greyleg Investments Ltd (Baltonsborough, United Kingdom)

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 22 November 2013 given in Case R 1091/2012-4;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.





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 word mark ‘HOKEY POKEY’ for ‘confectionery’ in Class 30 — Community trade mark application No 9 275 678

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Earlier, non-registered trade mark ‘HOKEY POKEY’ claimed to be in use in the United Kingdom for ‘confectionery, namely ice cream’

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(4) CTMR.
Case C-44/14: Action brought on 27 January 2014 — Kingdom of Spain v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Ireland, Schengen Agreement, United Kingdom, border control, cooperation agreement (EU), third country








C_2014071EN.01001301.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/13






Action brought on 27 January 2014 — Kingdom of Spain v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
(Case C-44/14)
(2014/C 71/22)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, Agent)

Defendants: European Parliament and Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 (1) establishing the European Border Surveillance System (Eurosur);










—


order the European Parliament and Council of the European Union to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments



Infringement of Article 4 of the Schengen Protocol in conjunction with Article 5 thereof.
 Article 19 of the Eurosur Regulation establishes an ad hoc procedure for the participation of the United Kingdom and Ireland through cooperation agreements. It therefore establishes a procedure for the participation of those Member States distinct from that provided for in Article 4 of the Schengen Protocol, effectively placing the United Kingdom and Ireland in the position of a third country outside the European Union.


(1)  OJ 2013 L 295, p. 11.
Case T-60/14: Action brought on 27 January 2014 — BMV Mineralöl Versorgungsgesellschaft v OHIM — Delek Europe (GO)
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014093EN.01002702.xml










29.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/27





Action brought on 27 January 2014 — BMV Mineralöl Versorgungsgesellschaft v OHIM — Delek Europe (GO)
(Case T-60/14)
2014/C 93/48
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: BMV Mineralöl Versorgungsgesellschaft mbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: M. Von Fuchs and I. Czernik, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Delek Europe BV (Breda, Netherlands)

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 22 November 2013 in Case R 382/2013-4;










—


order the intervener to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred during the appeal proceedings;










—


in the alternative, if the intervener does not declare its participation in the proceedings, order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred during the appeal proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Delek Europe BV

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark, containing the word element ‘GO’, for goods and services in Classes 9, 35 and 36 (Community trade mark application No 9 995 201)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative mark, containing the word element ‘GO’, for goods and services in Classes 4, 19, 35, 39 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition partially dismissed

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
Case C-39/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Bodenverwertungs- und -verwaltungs GmbH (BVVG) and Others
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: agricultural land, agricultural structure, invitation to tender, price of farm land, public institution








C_2014102EN.01001901.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/19





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Bodenverwertungs- und -verwaltungs GmbH (BVVG) and Others
(Case C-39/14)
2014/C 102/26
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bodenverwertungs- und -verwaltungs GmbH (BVVG)

Other parties: Thomas Erbs, Ursula Erbs

Consent authority: Landkreis Jerichower Land

Question referred

Does Article 107(1) TFEU preclude a national provision such as Paragraph 9(1), no. 3, GrdstVG, which, for the improvement of the social structure of agriculture, in effect prohibits an agency such as Bodenverwertungs- und -verwaltungs GmbH (BVVG), which must be ascribed to the State, from selling to the highest bidder in a public call for tenders agricultural land available for sale, if the highest bid is grossly disproportionate to the value of the land?
Case T-70/14: Action brought on 27 January 2014 — UAB MELT WATER v OHIM (Form of a bottle)
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, water supply








C_2014112EN.01004901.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/49





Action brought on 27 January 2014 — UAB MELT WATER v OHIM (Form of a bottle)

(Case T-70/14)
2014/C 112/63
Language in which the application was lodged: Lithuanian

Parties


Applicant: Research and Production Company MELT WATER UAB (Klaipėda, Lithuania) (represented by V. Viešūnaitė, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2013 in Case R 481/2013-5 and order OHIM to register, as a Community trade mark, the mark consisting of the form of a bottle in respect of which the applicant, Research and Production Company MELT WATER UAB, has sought registration (application No 010 751 584);










—


award costs in favour of the applicant, Research and Production Company MELT WATER UAB;










—


order the defendant, OHIM, to produce the file concerning the action relating to that application for registration of a Community trade mark (application No 010 751 584).





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant.

Community trade mark in respect of which registration is sought: a three-dimensional mark consisting of the form of a bottle, for goods in Class 32 — application No 010 751 584 for registration of a Community trade mark.

Decision of the Examiner: application rejected.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Articles 4 and 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, together with the case-law of the European Union Courts.
Case C-45/14: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fövárosi Ítelőtábla lodged on 27 January 2014 — Criminal proceedings against Isztván Balázs and Dániel Papp
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: charge, legality, misuse of a right, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2014142EN.01001001.xml










12.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/10





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fövárosi Ítelőtábla lodged on 27 January 2014 — Criminal proceedings against Isztván Balázs and Dániel Papp
(Case C-45/14)
2014/C 142/12
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Ítelőtábla

Party/parties to the main proceedings


Defendants: Isztván Balázs and Dániel Papp

Other party: Fővárosi Fellebbviteli Főügyészség

Question(s) referred

The Court of Justice is asked give a preliminary ruling on the question whether the rules or lack of rules on lawful accusation in Paragraph 2 of the Hungarian Law on criminal procedure






1.


Breach the ‘right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’ enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?










2.


Result in the breach of the ‘right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence’ enshrined in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in Article 14(7) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in Article 4(1) of Protocol No 7 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950?










3.


Result in the breach of the ‘prohibition of abuse of rights’ laid down by Article 54 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?
Case C-42/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Minister Finansów v Wojskowa Agencja Mieszkaniowa w Warszawie
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, business lease, supplies contract








C_2014135EN.01001901.xml










5.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/19






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Minister Finansów v Wojskowa Agencja Mieszkaniowa w Warszawie
(Case C-42/14)
(2014/C 135/21)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Minister Finansów

Respondent on a point of law: Wojskowa Agencja Mieszkaniowa w Warszawie

Questions referred







(1)


Must Article 14(1), Article 15(1) and Article 24(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) be interpreted as meaning that there are supplies by the landlord of electricity, heat, water and refuse disposal services to the tenant of the premises directly using those goods and services, which are supplied to those premises by specialist third persons, in a situation where one of the parties to the agreements for the supply of those goods and services is the landlord, who simply passes on the costs thereof to the tenant who actually uses them?










(2)


If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, do the costs of electricity, heat, water and refuse disposal used by the tenant of the premises increase, as regards the landlord, the taxable amount (rent), as referred to in Article 73 of Directive 2006/112/EC, resulting from the supply of the rental service, or do the supplies of goods and services in question constitute supplies separate from the rental service?






(1)  
            OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case C-40/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 27 January 2014  — Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Chef de l’agence de poursuites de la Direction nationale du renseignement et des enquêtes douanières, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects de Lyon v Utopia SARL, operating under the business name Marshall Bioresources
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: animal experimentation, exemption from customs duties, import (EU), transport of animals








C_2014102EN.01001902.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/19





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Chef de l’agence de poursuites de la Direction nationale du renseignement et des enquêtes douanières, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects de Lyon v Utopia SARL, operating under the business name Marshall Bioresources
(Case C-40/14)
2014/C 102/27
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Chef de l’agence de poursuites de la Direction nationale du renseignement et des enquêtes douanières, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects de Lyon

Defendant: Utopia SARL, operating under the business name Marshall Bioresources

Questions referred







1.


Is an importer of animals specially prepared for laboratory use entitled to the relief from import duties provided for for goods of this type by Article 60 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty (1) when it is not itself a public establishment or an authorised private establishment which is principally engaged in education or scientific research, but its clients are establishments meeting those conditions?










2.


Must Rule 5(b) of the General Rules for the interpretation of the combined nomenclature be interpreted as meaning that cages used for transportation of live animals intended for laboratory research should be categorised as packing materials or packing containers for the purposes of that rule?
If so, must the words ‘clearly suitable for repetitive use’ in relation to such packing materials or packing containers be assessed in general or only in respect of re-use within the Union?






(1)  OJ L 1983 105, p. 1.
Case F-134/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 27 January 2014 — Loescher v Council
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, indemnification, remuneration of work, rights of civil servants, social-security benefit








C_2014071EN.01003603.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/36






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 27 January 2014 — Loescher v Council
(Case F-134/12) (1)

(2014/C 71/73)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013, p. 74.
Judgment of the Court of 27 January 2014 in Case E-1/13 — Míla ehf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: State aid, administrative competition, control of State aid, lease, private investment, telecommunications equipment








C_2014121EN.01000601.xml










24.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 121/6





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 27 January 2014
in Case E-1/13
Míla ehf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority

(Action for annulment — State aid — Lease contract — Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure — Admissibility — Legal interest — Status as interested party — Doubts or serious difficulties — Market investor principle — Tender procedure)

(2014/C 121/06)
In Case E-1/13, Míla ehf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority — APPLICATION for the annulment of EFTA Surveillance Authority’s Decision No 410/12/COL of 21 November 2012 on alleged State aid through the subsidised lease of optical fibres previously operated on behalf of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (‘NATO’) the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President and Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 27 January 2014, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Annuls ESA Decision No 410/12/COL of 21 November 2012 on alleged State aid through the subsidised lease of optical fibres previously operated on behalf of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (‘NATO’).










2.


Orders ESA to pay the costs of the proceedings.
Case T-69/14: Action brought on 27 January 2014 — UAB MELT WATER v OHIM (MELT WATER Original)
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, water supply








C_2014112EN.01004802.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/48





Action brought on 27 January 2014 — UAB MELT WATER v OHIM (MELT WATER Original)
(Case T-69/14)
2014/C 112/62
Language in which the application was lodged: Lithuanian

Parties


Applicant: Research and Production Company MELT WATER UAB (Klaipėda, Lithuania) (represented by V. Viešūnaitė, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2013 in Case R 494/2013-5 and order OHIM to register, as a Community trade mark, the mark ‘MELT WATER Original’ in respect of which the applicant, Research and Production Company MELT WATER UAB, has sought registration (application No 01 078 2068);










—


award costs in favour of the applicant, Research and Production Company MELT WATER UAB;










—


order the defendant, OHIM, to produce the file concerning the action relating to that application for registration of a Community trade mark (application No 010 782 068).





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant.

Community trade mark in respect of which registration is sought: a light-blue figurative mark containing the word elements ‘MELT WATER Original’, for goods in Class 32 — application No 010 782 068 for registration of a Community trade mark.

Decision of the Examiner: application rejected.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Article 7(1)(c) and 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, together with the related case-law of the European Union Courts.
Case F-136/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 27 January 2014 — Carpenito v Council
Date: 2014-01-27
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, indemnification, pay








C_2014071EN.01003701.xml










8.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/37






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 27 January 2014 — Carpenito v Council
(Case F-136/12) (1)

(2014/C 71/74)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013, p. 75.