do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-588/12: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the arbeidshof te Antwerpen (Belgium)) — Lyreco Belgium NV v Sophie Rogiers (Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clauses 1 and 2.4 — Part-time parental leave — Dismissal of a worker without compelling or sufficient reason — Fixed-sum protective award on account of the taking of parental leave — Method of calculating the amount of award)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: framework agreement, parental allowance, severance pay, social policy








C_2014112EN.01001101.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/11





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the arbeidshof te Antwerpen (Belgium)) — Lyreco Belgium NV v Sophie Rogiers
(Case C-588/12) (1)

((Social policy - Directive 96/34/EC - Framework agreement on parental leave - Clauses 1 and 2.4 - Part-time parental leave - Dismissal of a worker without compelling or sufficient reason - Fixed-sum protective award on account of the taking of parental leave - Method of calculating the amount of award))
2014/C 112/12
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Arbeidshof te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Lyreco Belgium NV

Defendant: Sophie Rogiers

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Arbeidshof te Antwerpen — Belgium — Interpretation of clauses 1 and 2.4, of the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and ETUC, contained in the Annex to Council Directive 96/34/EC of 3 June 1996 (OJ 1996 L 145, p. 4) — Part-time parental leave — Reduction of benefits — Termination of a worker’s contract before the end of the period of parental leave without compelling reason — Method of calculating the amount of redundancy compensation.

Operative part of the judgment

On a proper construction of clause 2.4 of the framework agreement on parental leave concluded on 14 December 1995, which is set out in the annex to Council Directive 96/34/EC of 3 June 1996 on the framework agreement on parental leave concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC, as amended by Council Directive 97/75/EC of 15 December 1997 read in the light both of the objectives of that Framework Agreement and of clause 2.6 thereof, it is contrary to that provision for the fixed-sum protective award payable to a worker on part-time parental leave, where the employer unilaterally and without compelling or sufficient reason terminates that worker’s full-time contract of indefinite duration, to be determined on the basis of the reduced salary earned by that worker at the date of the dismissal.


(1)  OJ C 79, 16.3.2013.
Case C-1/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Cartier parfums — lunettes SAS, Axa Corporate Solutions assurances SA v Ziegler France SA, Montgomery Transports SARL, Inko Trade s.r.o., Jaroslav Matěja, Groupama Transport (Request for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 27(2) — Lis pendens — Article 24 — Prorogation of jurisdiction — Establishment of jurisdiction of the court first seised by reason of appearance being entered without objection by the parties or the adoption of a final judgment)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, rights of the defence








C_2014112EN.01001202.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/12





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Cartier parfums — lunettes SAS, Axa Corporate Solutions assurances SA v Ziegler France SA, Montgomery Transports SARL, Inko Trade s.r.o., Jaroslav Matěja, Groupama Transport
(Case C-1/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 27(2) - Lis pendens - Article 24 - Prorogation of jurisdiction - Establishment of jurisdiction of the court first seised by reason of appearance being entered without objection by the parties or the adoption of a final judgment))
2014/C 112/14
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Cartier parfums — lunettes SAS, Axa Corporate Solutions assurances SA

Defendants: Ziegler France SA, Montgomery Transports SARL, Inko Trade s.r.o., Jaroslav Matěja, Groupama Transport

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Cour de cassation (France) — Interpretation of Article 27(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001, L 12, p. 1) — Lis pendens — Establishment of the jurisdiction of the court first seised because neither party has claimed that it lacks jurisdiction or because it has adopted a decision which is irrevocable for any reason whatsoever.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 27(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, except in the situation where the court second seised has exclusive jurisdiction by virtue of that regulation, the jurisdiction of the court first seised must be regarded as being established, within the meaning of that provision, if that court has not declined jurisdiction of its own motion and none of the parties has contested its jurisdiction prior to or up to the time at which a position is adopted which is regarded in national procedural law as being the first defence on the substance submitted before that court.


(1)  OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
P7_TA(2014)0165 European Investigation Order ***I European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 February 2014 on the draft directive of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters (09288/2010 — C7-0185/2010 — 2010/0817(COD)) P7_TC1-COD(2010)0817 Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 27 February 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: criminal liability, exchange of information, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, judicial inquiry, mutual recognition principle, proof, ruling








C_2017285EN.01072701.xml










29.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 285/727





P7_TA(2014)0165
European Investigation Order ***I
European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 February 2014 on the draft directive of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters (09288/2010 — C7-0185/2010 — 2010/0817(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
(2017/C 285/66)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the initiative emanating from a group of Member States submitted to Parliament and the Council (09288/2010),










—


having regard to Article 76(b) and Article 82(1)(a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the draft act was submitted to Parliament (C7-0185/2010),










—


having regard to Article 294(3) and (15) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 5 December 2013 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to Rules 44 and 55 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0477/2013),












1.


Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.






P7_TC1-COD(2010)0817
Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 27 February 2014 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2014/…/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive 2014/41/EU.)
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014056EN.01000301.xml










27.2.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 56/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

26 February 2014
2014/C 56/03

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3726




JPY


Japanese yen


140,50




DKK


Danish krone


7,4623




GBP


Pound sterling


0,82260




SEK


Swedish krona


8,9287




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2198




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,3070




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,325




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,35




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1611




RON


Romanian leu


4,5180




TRY


Turkish lira


3,0461




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5288




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5230




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,6497




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6500




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7365




KRW


South Korean won


1 466,34




ZAR


South African rand


14,8262




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,4073




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6595




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 942,91




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4957




PHP


Philippine peso


61,227




RUB


Russian rouble


49,4672




THB


Thai baht


44,681




BRL


Brazilian real


3,2143




MXN


Mexican peso


18,1986




INR


Indian rupee


85,2865






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-128/11: Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — LG Display and LG Display Taiwan v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Worldwide market for liquid crystal display (LCD) panels — Agreements and concerted practices concerning prices and production capacity — Internal sales — Rights of the defence — Fines — Partial immunity from fines — Single and continuous infringement — Ne bis in idem principle)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: fine, international trade, price agreement, rights of the defence, screen








C_2014102EN.01003201.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/32





Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — LG Display and LG Display Taiwan v Commission
(Case T-128/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Worldwide market for liquid crystal display (LCD) panels - Agreements and concerted practices concerning prices and production capacity - Internal sales - Rights of the defence - Fines - Partial immunity from fines - Single and continuous infringement - Ne bis in idem principle))
2014/C 102/50
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: LG Display Co. Ltd (Seoul, South Korea); and LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd, (Taipei, Taiwan) (represented by: A. Winckler and F.-C. Laprévote, lawyers),

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Van Nuffel and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents, and by S. Kingston BL)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 8761 final of 8 December 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Case COMP/39.309 — LCD — Liquid Crystal Displays), and for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets at EUR 210 000 000 the fine imposed jointly and severally on LG Display Co. Ltd and LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd in Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2010) 8761 final of 8 December 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Case COMP/39.309 — LCD — Liquid Crystal Displays);










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders LG Display and LG Display Taiwan to bear their own costs and to pay three-quarters of the costs incurred by the European Commission;










4.


Orders the Commission to bear one-quarter of its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 130, 30.4.2011.
Case T-602/11: Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014  — Pêra-Grave v OHIM — Fundação Eugénio de Almeida (Q TA S. JOSÉ DE PERAMANCA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark Q TA S. JOSÉ DE PERAMANCA — Earlier national figurative marks VINHO PERA-MANCA TINTO, VINHO PERA-MANCA BRANCO and PÊRA-MANCA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_2014112EN.01002801.xml










14.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/28





Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — Pêra-Grave v OHIM — Fundação Eugénio de Almeida (QTA S. JOSÉ DE PERAMANCA)
(Case T-602/11) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark QTA S. JOSÉ DE PERAMANCA - Earlier national figurative marks VINHO PERA-MANCA TINTO, VINHO PERA-MANCA BRANCO and PÊRA-MANCA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2014/C 112/36
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Pêra-Grave — Sociedade Agrícola, Unipessoal Lda (Evora, Portugal) (represented by: J. de Oliveira Vaz Miranda Sousa, lawyer)

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: Fundação Eugénio de Almeida (Evora) (represented by: B. Braga da Cruz and J. Pimenta, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 September 2011 (Case R 1797/2010-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Fundação Eugénio de Almeida and Pêra-Grave — Sociedade Agrícola, Unipessoal Lda.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Pêra-Grave — Sociedade Agrícola, Unipessoal Lda to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Fundação Eugénio de Almeida for the purposes 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 32, 4.2.2012.
Case T-256/11: Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — Ezz and Others v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Egypt — Freezing of funds — Legal basis — Obligation to state reasons — Error of fact — Rights of the defence — Right to effective judicial protection — Right to property — Freedom to conduct a business)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Egypt, capital movement, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal basis, ownership, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2014102EN.01003202.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/32





Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — Ezz and Others v Council
(Case T-256/11) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Egypt - Freezing of funds - Legal basis - Obligation to state reasons - Error of fact - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Right to property - Freedom to conduct a business))
2014/C 102/51
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Ahmed Abdelaziz Ezz (Giza, Egypt); Abla Mohammed Fawzi Ali Ahmed (London, United Kingdom); Khadiga Ahmed Ahmed Kamel Yassin (London); and Shahinaz Abdel Azizabdel Wahab Al Naggar (Giza) (represented: initially by M. Lester, Barrister, and J. Binns, Solicitor, and subsequently by J. Binns, J. Lewis QC, B. Kennelly, Barrister, and I. Burton, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and I. Gurov, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher, M. Konstantinidis and A. Bordes, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment, first, of Council Decision 2011/172/CFSP of 21 March 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt (OJ 2011 L 76, p. 63) and, secondly, of Council Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 of 21 March 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt (OJ 2011 L 76, p. 4), in so far as those acts concern the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Ahmed Abdelaziz Ezz, Ms Abla Mohammed Fawzi Ali Ahmed, Ms Khadiga Ahmed Ahmed Kamel Yassin and Ms Shahinaz Abdel Azizabdel Wahab Al Naggar to bear their own costs and, in addition, to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 19.3.2011.
Case T-37/12: Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014  — Advance Magazine Publishers v OHIM — López Cabré (TEEN VOGUE) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark TEEN VOGUE — Earlier national word mark VOGUE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Identical nature of the goods — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Rule 22(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Partial refusal to register)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, serial publication, trade-mark law, young person








C_2014102EN.01003301.xml










7.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 102/33





Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — Advance Magazine Publishers v OHIM — López Cabré (TEEN VOGUE)
(Case T-37/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark TEEN VOGUE - Earlier national word mark VOGUE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Identical nature of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rule 22(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Partial refusal to register))
2014/C 102/52
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (New York, New York, United States of America) (represented by T. Alkin, Barrister)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by P. Bullock, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Eduardo López Cabré (Barcelona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 November 2011 (case R 1763/2010-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Mr Eduardo López Cabré and Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc., to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 73, 10.3.2012.
Case F-32/13: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014  — Walton v Commission (Civil service  — Temporary agent  — Severance grant  — Resignation found by judgment of the General Court of the European Communities  — Determination of the date of resignation  — Authority of res judicata  — Decisions of the appointing authority becoming definitive in the absence of legal action  — Non-observance of the prior administrative procedure  — Manifestly inadmissible)
Date: 2014-02-27
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: indemnification, servant (EU), termination of employment








C_2014142EN.01005602.xml










12.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/56





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 — Walton v Commission
(Case F-32/13) (1)

((Civil service - Temporary agent - Severance grant - Resignation found by judgment of the General Court of the European Communities - Determination of the date of resignation - Authority of res judicata - Decisions of the appointing authority becoming definitive in the absence of legal action - Non-observance of the prior administrative procedure - Manifestly inadmissible))
2014/C 142/76
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Robert Walton (Oxford, United Kingdom) (represented by: F. Moyse, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and A.-C. Simon, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of the rejection of the application for reimbursement of the unpaid sum which the Commission ought to pay to the applicant as the severance grant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Walton must bear his own costs and is ordered pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 207, 20/07/2013, p. 58.