do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Joined Cases T-174/12 and T-80/13: Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken against Syria — Freezing of funds — Adaptation of the claim — Time-limit — Manifest error of assessment — Obligation to state reasons — Right to effective judicial protection — Rights of defence)
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Syria, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2014078EN.01000901.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/9





Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank v Council
(Joined Cases T-174/12 and T-80/13) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Adaptation of the claim - Time-limit - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons - Right to effective judicial protection - Rights of defence)
2014/C 78/17
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank SAL (Beirut, Lebanon) (represented by: P. Vanderveeren, L. Defalque and T. Bontinck, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: G. Étienne and S. Cook, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulation in part, firstly, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 55/2012 of 23 January 2012 implementing Article [32](1) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2012 L 19, p. 6); secondly, of Council Implementing Decision 2012/37/CFSP of 23 January 2012 implementing Decision 2011/782/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2012 L 19, p. 33); thirdly, Council Decision 2012/739/CFSP of 29 November 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Syria and repealing Decision 2011/782/CFSP (OJ 2012 L 330, p. 21); fourthly, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1117/2012 of 29 November 2012 implementing Article 32(1) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 (OJ 2012 L 330, p. 9); fifthly, the ‘decision letters’ of the Council of 24 January 2012 and 30 November 2012 notifying the applicant of the restrictive measures affecting it; sixthly, Council Decision 2013/109/CFSP of 28 February 2013 amending Decision 2012/739/CFSP (OJ 2013 L 58, p. 8); seventhly, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 363/2013 of 22 April 2013 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 (OJ 2013 L 111, p. 1); eighthly, Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP of 31 May 2013 concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2013 L 147, p. 14), in so far as those acts affect the applicant’s situation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders the Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank SAL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 184, 23.6.2012.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 February 2014 on the draft Council decision authorising Member States to sign, ratify or accede to the Cape Town Agreement of 2012 on the Implementation of the Provisions of the Torremolinos Protocol of 1993 relating to the Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels, 1977 (13408/2013 — C7-0389/2013 — 2013/0020(NLE))
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: Committee on Fisheries, Committee on Transport and Tourism, European Parliament
Subjects: EU Member State, fishing vessel, international convention, maritime safety, protocol to an agreement, signature of an agreement








C_2017093EN.01016401.xml










24.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/164





P7_TA(2014)0050
Cape Town Agreement of 2012 on the Implementation of the Provisions of the 1993 Protocol relating to the Torremolinos International Convention of 1977 for the Safety of Fishing Vessels ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 4 February 2014 on the draft Council decision authorising Member States to sign, ratify or accede to the Cape Town Agreement of 2012 on the Implementation of the Provisions of the Torremolinos Protocol of 1993 relating to the Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels, 1977 (13408/2013 — C7-0389/2013 — 2013/0020(NLE))
(Consent)
(2017/C 093/34)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (13408/2013),










—


having regard to the Cape Town Agreement of 2012 on the Implementation of the Provisions of the 1993 Protocol relating to the Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels, 1977,










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 100(2) and 218(5), Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v) and Article 218(8) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0389/2013),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0040/2014),










1.


Consents to the draft Council decision;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
Case T-83/14: Action brought on 4 February 2014 — LTJ Diffusion v OHIM — Arthur et Aston (ARTHUR & ASTON).
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2014112EN.01005101.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/51





Action brought on 4 February 2014 — LTJ Diffusion v OHIM — Arthur et Aston (ARTHUR & ASTON).
(Case T-83/14)
2014/C 112/65
Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties


Applicant: LTJ Diffusion (Colombes, France) (represented by: S. Lederman, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Arthur et Aston SAS (Giberville, France)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 2 December 2013 in Case R 1963/2012-1 in so far as it ruled that the use of the earlier mark ‘ARTHUR’ No 17731 did not comply with the provisions of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


if the Court, following its case-law (judgment of 4 June 2013, Case T-514/11, ‘DECATHLON’), finds that it has no power to rule on the merits of the opposition filed by the company LTJ DIFFUSION on 14 April 2011 since the Board of Appeal has not yet adopted a position, it is also asked the following: to refer the case to the competent formation of the Court for a ruling to be made on the merits of the opposition filed by the company LTJ DIFFUSION on 14 April 2011 against the application for registration of the Community trade mark No 9509911, relating to the word sign ‘ARTHUR & ASTON’, to designate certain goods in Classes 3, 9, 14 and 25 and specifically ‘footwear, boots and shoes’.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Arthur et Aston SAS

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ARTHUR & ASTON’ for goods in Classes 3, 9, 14 and 25 (Community trade mark application No 9 509 911)

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National semi-figurative trade mark containing the word element ‘Arthur’ for goods in Class 25.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-127/12: Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Free v OHIM — Noble Gaming (FREEVOLUTION TM) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark FREEVOLUTION TM — Earlier national figurative mark free LA LIBERTÉ N’A PAS DE PRIX and earlier national word marks FREE and FREE MOBILE — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity between the signs — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, gaming establishment, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014078EN.01000802.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/8





Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Free v OHIM — Noble Gaming (FREEVOLUTION TM)
(Case T-127/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark FREEVOLUTION TM - Earlier national figurative mark free LA LIBERTÉ N’A PAS DE PRIX and earlier national word marks FREE and FREE MOBILE - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2014/C 78/16
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Free SAS (Paris, France) (represented by: Y. Coursin, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Meglar, agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Noble Gaming Ltd (Prague, Czech Republic)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 December 2011 (Case R 2326/2010-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Free SAS and Noble Gaming Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Free SAS to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.7111 — Mitsui/ArcelorMittal Gonvarri Brasil Produtos Siderúrgicos/M Steel Comércio de Produtos Siderúrgicos)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Brazil, economic concentration, energy industry, merger control, metallurgical industry, steel








C_2014032EN.01000101.xml










4.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 32/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.7111 — Mitsui/ArcelorMittal Gonvarri Brasil Produtos Siderúrgicos/M Steel Comércio de Produtos Siderúrgicos)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 32/01
On 29 January 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7111. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.
Case T-77/14: Action brought on 4 February 2014 — EE v OHIM (Device of grey pattern)
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2014135EN.01004601.xml










5.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/46






Action brought on 4 February 2014 — EE v OHIM (Device of grey pattern)
(Case T-77/14)
(2014/C 135/58)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 October 2013 given in Case R 704/2013-1.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The figurative trade mark representing a device of grey pattern for goods and services in Classes 7, 9, 16, 25, 35-39, 41, 42 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 11 388 386
         

Decision of the Examiner: Found the mark applied for not eligible for registration

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) CTMR.
European Parliament decision of 4 February 2014 on the nomination of Klaus Heiner Lehne as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0423/2013 — 2013/0813(NLE))
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, European Parliament
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, appointment of members








C_2017093EN.01024301.xml










24.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/243





P7_TA(2014)0059
Appointment of a member of the Court of Auditors (Klaus-Heiner LEHNE — DE)
European Parliament decision of 4 February 2014 on the nomination of Klaus Heiner Lehne as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0423/2013 — 2013/0813(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2017/C 093/40)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0423/2013),










—


having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0050/2014),










A.


whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










B.


whereas at its meeting of 23 January 2014, the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;












1.


Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Klaus Heiner Lehne as a Member of the Court of Auditors;












2.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.
Case T-357/12: Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture v OHIM — Gandia Blasco (Armchair) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing an armchair — Earlier design — Ground for invalidity — Lack of individual character — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, furniture industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014078EN.01001001.xml










15.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/10





Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture v OHIM — Gandia Blasco (Armchair)
(Case T-357/12) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an armchair - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
2014/C 78/19
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture, Lda (Estarreja, Portugal) (represented by: M. Oehen Mendes, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Gandia Blasco, SA (Valencia, Spain) (represented by: I. Sempere Massa, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 April 2012 (Case R 969/2011-3) in relation to invalidity proceedings between Gandia Blasco, SA and Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture, Lda.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture Lda to pay its own costs and also the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM);










3.


Orders Gandia Blasco, SA to pay its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 311, 13.10.2012.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 102/2014 of 4 February 2014 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 872/2004 concerning further restrictive measures in relation to Liberia
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Liberia, economic sanctions, international sanctions








L_2014034EN.01000401.xml










5.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 34/4








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 102/2014
of 4 February 2014
         
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 872/2004 concerning further restrictive measures in relation to Liberia


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 872/2004 of 29 April 2004 concerning further restrictive measures in relation to Liberia (1), and in particular Article 11(a) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 872/2004 lists the natural and legal persons, bodies and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.












(2)


On 23 December 2013, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council established pursuant to resolution 1521 (2003) concerning Liberia decided to remove one person from the list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply.












(3)


Annex I should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 872/2004 is hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.


Article 2
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 the Member States in accordance with the Treaties.
Done at Brussels, 4 February 2014.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,


the Head of the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments






(1)  
            OJ L 162, 30.4.2004, p. 32.




ANNEX
Annex I to Regulation (EC) 872/2004 is amended as follows:
The following entry is deleted:


            ‘Benoni Urey. Date of birth: 22.6.1957. Passports: (a) Liberian diplomatic passport: D-00148399, (b) Commissioner of Maritime Passport: D/002356. Other information: former Commissioner of Maritime Affairs of Liberia.’
Case C-53/14 P: Appeal brought on 4 February 2014 by JAS Jet Air Service France (JAS) against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 3 December 2013 in Case T-573/11 JAS Jet Air Service France v Commission
Date: 2014-02-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: customs fraud, customs union, import (EU), textile product








C_2014102EN.01002201.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/22





Appeal brought on 4 February 2014 by JAS Jet Air Service France (JAS) against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 3 December 2013 in Case T-573/11 JAS Jet Air Service France v Commission
(Case C-53/14 P)
2014/C 102/31
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: JAS Jet Air Service France (JAS) (represented by: T. Gallois and E. Dereviankine, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


annul the decision of the General Court as it is set out in the operative part of the judgment given on 3 December 2013 in Case T-573/11;










—


grant the form of order sought at first instance by the company JAS Jet Air Service France in so far as it seeks the annulment of the Decision of the European Commission dated 5 August 2011 in Case REM 01/2008 dismissing the application for remission of import duties amounting to EUR 1 001 778,20 which it presented on 24 January 2008;










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant relies on two grounds in support of its appeal against the judgment by which the General Court upheld the decision of the Commission of 5 August 2011 dismissing the application for remission of import duties presented by the appellant.
In the first place, the appellant alleges that the General Court infringed Articles 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 (1) and 239 of the Community Customs Code, (2) in so far as it failed to acknowledge the existence of a ‘special situation’ allowing the remission applied for. The General Court maintained that the appellant’s situation was not similar to that of the company CALBERSON BV (case REM 10/01), to which the Commission had granted the remission.
In the second place, the appellant considers that the General Court infringed the articles cited above, in so far as it failed to take account, for the purpose of recognising the existence of a ‘special situation’, of the deficiency which took place at the level of the internal procedure for the issue and review of import authorisations without VAT, known as A12 (Article 275 of the French General Tax Code and its implementing provisions). The General Court reversed the burden of proof, and therefore infringed the general principles of law, by holding that it was for the appellant to establish precisely the consequences of that deficiency.


(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties (OJ 1979 L 175, p. 1).

(2)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1).