do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-17/12: Order of the President of the Court of 13 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — TVI Televisão Independente SA v Fazenda Pública
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Portugal, VAT, accounting, basis of tax assessment








C_2014184EN.01002101.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/21





Order of the President of the Court of 13 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — TVI Televisão Independente SA v Fazenda Pública
(Case C-17/12) (1)

2014/C 184/25
Language of the case: Portuguese
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 98, 31. 3. 2012.
Case F-20/13: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 February 2014 — Moës v Commission
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: damages, disability insurance, indemnification, pension scheme








C_2014093EN.01002901.xml










29.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/29





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 February 2014 — Moës v Commission
(Case F-20/13) (1)

2014/C 93/50
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 114, 20.4.2013, p. 48.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 159/2014 of 13 February 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Patata dell’Alto Viterbese (PGI))
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, Latium, designation of origin, labelling, potato, product designation








L_2014052EN.01000501.xml










21.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 52/5








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 159/2014
of 13 February 2014
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Patata dell’Alto Viterbese (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy’s application to register the name ‘Patata dell’Alto Viterbese’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Patata dell’Alto Viterbese’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 13 February 2014.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Janusz LEWANDOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 239, 20.8.2013, p. 2.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

ITALY
Patata dell’Alto Viterbese (PGI)
Case C-466/12: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt — Sweden) — Nils Svensson, Sten Sjögren, Madelaine Sahlman, Pia Gadd v Retriever Sverige AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Information society — Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights — Article 3(1) — Communication to the public — Meaning — Internet links ( ‘clickable links’ ) giving access to protected works)
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet address, copyright, information society, search engine








C_2014093EN.01001201.xml










29.3.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/12





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt — Sweden) — Nils Svensson, Sten Sjögren, Madelaine Sahlman, Pia Gadd v Retriever Sverige AB
(Case C-466/12) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Information society - Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights - Article 3(1) - Communication to the public - Meaning - Internet links (‘clickable links’) giving access to protected works)
2014/C 93/18
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Svea hovrätt

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Nils Svensson, Sten Sjögren, Madelaine Sahlman, Pia Gadd

Defendant: Retriever Sverige AB

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Svea Hovrätt — Interpretation of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10) — Research and monitoring website offering its subscribers a service of access to protected works, in return for payment — Provision by a person other than the author of the work or his assignees of a link on the former’s web page giving access to the work.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, must be interpreted as meaning that the provision on a website of clickable links to works freely available on another website does not constitute an ‘act of communication to the public’, as referred to in that provision;










2.


Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29 must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from giving wider protection to copyright holders by laying down that the concept of communication to the public includes a wider range of activities than those referred to in that provision.






(1)  OJ C 379, 8.12.2012.
Case C-78/14 P: Appeal brought on 13 February 2014 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 12 December 2013 in Case T-117/12 ANKO v Commission
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, consortium, proof








C_2014102EN.01002601.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/26





Appeal brought on 13 February 2014 by the European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 12 December 2013 in Case T-117/12 ANKO v Commission
(Case C-78/14 P)
2014/C 102/36
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and B. Conte)

Other party to the proceedings: ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the judgment of the General Court;










—


order the respondent to pay the costs.





Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The Commission concluded, with two separate consortiums of which the respondent ΑΝΚΟ was a member, agreements for the granting of funding for the ‘OASIS’ and ‘PERFORM’ projects within the framework of the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities.
In the context of the agreement at issue, the Commission claims that the General Court misinterpreted the general terms of the agreement and in particular paragraph (3)(d) of Section II.5 (and incidentally Section ΙΙ.14, second subparagraph of paragraph (1)).
The misinterpretation of the general terms of the agreement can be broken down into the following particular grounds of appeal:






1.


An erroneous assessment of the serious and systematic nature of the irregularities as a ground for suspension;










2.


An erroneous assessment of the possibility/risk of repetition of the irregularities;










3.


An erroneous inference from the ad hoc adjustment;










4.


Misinterpretation of the option to use average costs and erroneous extension to use of fictitious costs — distortion of the evidence;










5.


Confusion of the criteria for suspension (suspicion) and the criteria for eligibility (certainty).
Case C-555/13: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral — Portugal) — Merck Canada Inc. v Accord Healthcare Ltd, Alter SA, Labochem Ltd, Synthon BV, Ranbaxy Portugal — Comércio e Desenvolvimento de Produtos Farmacêuticos, Unipessoal Lda (Request for a preliminary ruling — ‘Court or tribunal’ for the purposes of Article 267 TFEU — Tribunal Arbitral necessário — Admissibility — Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 — Article 13 — Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products — Period of validity of a certificate — Maximum period of exclusivity)
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: court of arbitration, health certificate, jurisdiction, marketing standard, medicinal product








C_2014184EN.01000901.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/9





Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral — Portugal) — Merck Canada Inc. v Accord Healthcare Ltd, Alter SA, Labochem Ltd, Synthon BV, Ranbaxy Portugal — Comércio e Desenvolvimento de Produtos Farmacêuticos, Unipessoal Lda
(Case C-555/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - ‘Court or tribunal’ for the purposes of Article 267 TFEU - Tribunal Arbitral necessário - Admissibility - Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 - Article 13 - Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products - Period of validity of a certificate - Maximum period of exclusivity))
2014/C 184/12
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Merck Canada Inc.

Defendants: Accord Healthcare Ltd, Alter SA, Labochem Ltd, Synthon BV, Ranbaxy Portugal — Comércio e Desenvolvimento de Produtos Farmacêuticos, Unipessoal Lda

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Arbitral — Interpretation of Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (Codified version) (OJ 2009 L 152, p. 1) — Duration of the certificate — Exclusivity period exceeding a maximum of 15 years from the first authorisation to be placed on the market of the medicinal product in question in the European Union

Operative part of the order

Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products, read in conjunction with recital 9 to the same regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes the holder of both a patent and a supplementary protection certificate from relying on the entire period of validity of such a certificate, calculated in accordance with Article 13, in a situation where, pursuant to such a period, it would enjoy a period of exclusivity as regards an active ingredient, of more than 15 years from the first authorisation to be placed on the market, in the European Union, of a medicinal product consisting of that active ingredient, or containing it.


(1)  OJ C 15, 18. 1. 2014.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.7150 — Apollo/Ulster Bank/Arnotts) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Ireland, economic concentration, electronic commerce, financial services, investment company, merger control








C_2014042EN.01000801.xml










13.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/8





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.7150 — Apollo/Ulster Bank/Arnotts)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 42/08)






1.


On 4 February 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which affiliates of Apollo Management LP (‘Apollo’, USA), and Ulster Bank Ireland Limited (‘Ulster Bank’, Ireland) belonging to the Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (UK) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Arnotts Holdings Limited (‘Arnotts’, Ireland) by other means.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Apollo: portfolio investment,










—


for Ulster Bank: retail and corporate banking,










—


for Arnotts: non-specialised retail stores in Ireland.














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.7150 — Apollo/Ulster Bank/Arnotts, 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 ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Notice of open competition
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, assistant, competition (EU), secretarial staff








C_2014042EN.01000701.xml










13.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 42/7





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
(2014/C 42/07)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising open competition:
EPSO/AST-SC/01/14 — Secretaries (SC1 and SC2 grades) for the following languages: Croatian (HR), English (EN), French (FR) and German (DE)
The competition notice will be published in 24 languages in Official Journal C 42 A of 13 February 2014.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/
Case C-177/13 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 February 2014 — Marek Marszałkowski v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co. KG (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Application for Community figurative mark with the word elements ‘Walichnowy’ and ‘Marko’  — Opposition by the proprietor of the Community word MAR-KO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion)
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, infringement of EU law, meat product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014184EN.01000501.xml










16.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 184/5





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 February 2014 — Marek Marszałkowski v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co. KG
(Case C-177/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Application for Community figurative mark with the word elements ‘Walichnowy’ and ‘Marko’ - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community word MAR-KO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion))
2014/C 184/06
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Appellant: Marek Marszałkowski (represented by: C. Sadkowski, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent), Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co.

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 4 February 2013 in Case T-159/11 Marszalkowski v OHIM — Mar-Ko Fleischwaren (WALICHNOWY MARKO), by which the General Court dismissed the action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 January 2011 (Case R 760/2010-4) which annulled the decision of the Opposition Division dismissing the opposition brought by the proprietor of the Community word mark ‘Mar-Ko’ in respect of goods in Class 29 of the Nice Agreement — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) and Article 48(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Marek Marszałkowski is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 207, 20. 7. 2013.
Case F-75/13: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 February 2014 — Probst v Commission (Staff cases — Officials — Expatriation allowance — Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations — Request for re-examination — Material new facts — Action manifestly inadmissible)
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, expatriate worker, indemnification








C_2014421EN.01005602.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/56





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 February 2014 — Probst v Commission
(Case F-75/13) (1)

((Staff cases - Officials - Expatriation allowance - Article 4 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Request for re-examination - Material new facts - Action manifestly inadmissible))
2014/C 421/80
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Norbert Probst (Genval, Belgium) (represented by: initially, D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers, and subsequently by D. Abreu Caldas, J.-N. Louis and S. Orlandi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and V. Joris, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision not to grant the applicant the benefit of the expatriation allowance.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Probst shall bear his own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 274 of 21/09/2013, p. 34.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 158/2014 of 13 February 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Daujėnų naminė duona (PGI))
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Lithuania, Panevėžys county, bread, designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2014052EN.01000301.xml










21.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 52/3








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 158/2014
of 13 February 2014
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Daujėnų naminė duona (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Lithuania’s application to register the name ‘Daujėnų naminė duona’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Daujėnų naminė duona’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth 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, 13 February 2014.


For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Janusz LEWANDOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 251, 31.8.2013, p. 8.




ANNEX
Agricultural products and foodstuffs listed in point I of Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012:

Class 2.4.   Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares

LITHUANIA
Daujėnų naminė duona (PGI)