do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-198/12: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 June 2014  — European Commission v Republic of Bulgaria (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Internal market in energy — Gas transmission — Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 — Articles 14(1) and 16(1) and (2)(b) — Obligation to guarantee maximum capacity — Virtual reverse flow gas capacity — Admissibility)
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: domestic market, energy transport, gas, infringement of EU law








C_2014253EN.01000501.xml










4.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/5





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 June 2014 — European Commission v Republic of Bulgaria
(Case C-198/12) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Internal market in energy - Gas transmission - Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 - Articles 14(1) and 16(1) and (2)(b) - Obligation to guarantee maximum capacity - Virtual reverse flow gas capacity - Admissibility))
2014/C 253/06
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann, S. Petrova, O. Beynet and T. Scharf, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Bulgaria (represented by: D. Drambozova, E. Petranova and Y. Atanasov, acting as Agents)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 14(1) and Article 16(1) and (2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on conditions for access to the natural gas transmission networks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1775/2005 (OJ 2009 L 211, p. 36) — Obligation to ensure that all market participants are guaranteed maximum capacity — No physical interconnection between the transit system and the national gas transmission system — Intergovernmental agreements preventing compliance with the obligation to make maximum capacity available — Scope of the obligation set out in the second paragraph of Article 351 TFEU

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 194, 30.6.2012.
Case T-477/13: Order of the General Court of 5 June 2014  — Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank v Council
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Syria, human rights, international sanctions








C_2014253EN.01006603.xml










4.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/66





Order of the General Court of 5 June 2014 — Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank v Council
(Case T-477/13) (1)

2014/C 253/92
Language of the case: French
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 336, 16.11.2013.
Case C-276/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 5 June 2014  — Gmina Wrocław v Minister Finansów
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Poland, VAT, municipality








C_2014303EN.01001601.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 5 June 2014 — Gmina Wrocław v Minister Finansów
(Case C-276/14)
2014/C 303/20
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Gmina Wrocław

Respondent: Minister Finansów

Question referred

In the light of Article 4(2), in conjunction with Article 5(3), of the Treaty on European Union, may an organisational entity of a municipality (a local government body in Poland) be regarded as a taxable person for purposes of VAT when it engages in activities other than as a public authority within the meaning of Article 13 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, (1) notwithstanding the fact that it does not satisfy the criterion of autonomy (independence) set out in Article 9(1) of that directive?


(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case C-277/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 5 June 2014  — PPUH Stehcemp Sp. j. Florian Stefanek, Janina Stefanek, Jarosław Stefanek v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, delivery, invoicing, supplier, tax harmonisation








C_2014303EN.01001602.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 5 June 2014 — PPUH Stehcemp Sp. j. Florian Stefanek, Janina Stefanek, Jarosław Stefanek v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi
(Case C-277/14)
2014/C 303/21
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: PPUH Stehcemp Sp. j. Florian Stefanek, Janina Stefanek, Jarosław Stefanek

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi

Questions referred







1)


Must Articles 2(1), 4(1) and (2), 5(1) and 10(1) and (2) 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 (1) (‘the Sixth Directive’) be interpreted as meaning that a transaction conducted in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, in which neither the taxable person nor the tax authorities are in a position to establish the identity of the actual supplier of the goods, constitutes a supply of goods?










2)


If the reply to Question 1 is in the affirmative, must Articles 17(2)(a), 18(1)(a) and 22(3) of the Sixth Directive be interpreted as precluding provisions of national law under which, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, tax cannot be deducted by the taxable person since the invoice was issued by a person who was not the actual supplier of the goods and it is not possible to establish the identity of the actual supplier of the goods and to require that supplier to pay the tax, or to identify the person required to pay the tax on the basis of the issuance of the invoice pursuant to Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive?






(1)  OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.
Case C-274/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Económico Administrativo Central de Madrid (Spain) lodged on 5 June 2014  — Banco de Santander, S.A.
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: amortisation, goodwill, holding company, shareholding








C_2014303EN.01001501.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/15





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Económico Administrativo Central de Madrid (Spain) lodged on 5 June 2014 — Banco de Santander, S.A.
(Case C-274/14)
2014/C 303/19
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Económico Administrativo Central de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Banco de Santander, S.A.

Questions referred







1)


Must Article 1(2) of the European Commission Decision (1) of 28 October 2009 on the tax amortisation of financial goodwill for foreign shareholding acquisitions C 45/07 be interpreted to the effect that the legitimate expectations recognised in that paragraph and in the terms in which they are confined therein to deduction of the tax amortisation of financial goodwill under Article 12.5 TRLIS are to be considered applicable in relation to indirect foreign shareholding acquisitions made through the direct acquisition of a non-resident holding company?










2)


If the answer to the first question is affirmative, is Decision C(2013) 4399 final of 17 July 2013 in State aid proceedings No SA. 35550 (2013/C) (ex 13/NN, ex 12/CP) — Tax amortisation of financial goodwill for foreign shareholding acquisitions, which decides to initiate the procedure provided for under Article 108(2) TFEU for infringement of Article 108 TFEU and of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 (2) of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (now Article 108 TFEU), invalid?






(1)  OJ 2011 L 7, p. 48.

(2)  OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1.
Case C-272/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 5 June 2014  — Skatteministeriet v Baby Dan A/S
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, bolt and screw industry








C_2014253EN.01002101.xml










4.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 253/21





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 5 June 2014 — Skatteministeriet v Baby Dan A/S
(Case C-272/14)
2014/C 253/27
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Skatteministeriet

Defendant: Baby Dan A/S

Question referred

Must spindles with the specific characteristics as described be classified under CN heading 7318 or 8302?
2014/338/EU: Decision of the European Central Bank of 5 June 2014 amending Decision ECB/2010/23 on the allocation of monetary income of the national central banks of Member States whose currency is the euro (ECB/2014/24)
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European System of Central Banks, euro area, single monetary policy




L_2014168EN.01011701.xml










7.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 168/117








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
         
of 5 June 2014
         
amending Decision ECB/2010/23 on the allocation of monetary income of the national central banks of Member States whose currency is the euro

(ECB/2014/24)


(2014/338/EU)



THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 32 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Decision ECB/2010/23 (1) establishes a mechanism for the pooling and allocation of monetary income arising from monetary policy operations.












(2)


Article 5(2) of Decision ECB/2010/23 specifies that the amount of each NCB's monetary income is to be reduced by an amount equivalent to any interest accrued or paid on liabilities included within the liability base, and in accordance with any decision of the Governing Council under the second subparagraph of Article 32.4 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank. It should be clarified that any income earned on liabilities included within the liability base should be added to the NCBs' monetary income to be pooled.












(3)


Decision ECB/2010/23 should be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1

Amendment

Article 5(2) of Decision ECB/2010/23 is replaced by the following:

‘2.   The amount of each NCB's monetary income shall be adjusted by an amount equivalent to any interest accrued, paid or received on liabilities included within the liability base, and in accordance with any decision of the Governing Council under the second subparagraph of Article 32.4 of the Statute of the ESCB.’.



Article 2

Entry into force

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Frankfurt am Main, 5 June 2014.


The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI
            





(1)  Decision ECB/2010/23 of 25 November 2010 on the allocation of monetary income of the national central banks of Member States whose currency is the euro (OJ L 35, 9.2.2011, p. 17).
Case C-350/13: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 June 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas (formerly Augstākās tiesas Senāts) — Latvia) — Antonio Gramsci Shipping Corp. and Others v Aivars Lembergs (Request for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Recognition and enforcement of provisional and protective measures — Annulment of the initial decision — Maintenance of the request for a preliminary ruling — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: conflict of jurisdiction, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, mutual recognition principle, ownership








C_2014261EN.01000701.xml










11.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 261/7





Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 June 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās tiesas (formerly Augstākās tiesas Senāts) — Latvia) — Antonio Gramsci Shipping Corp. and Others v Aivars Lembergs
(Case C-350/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Recognition and enforcement of provisional and protective measures - Annulment of the initial decision - Maintenance of the request for a preliminary ruling - No need to adjudicate))
2014/C 261/10
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākās tiesas (formerly Augstākās tiesas Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Antonio Gramsci Shipping Corp., Apollo Holdings Corp., Arctic Seal Shipping Co. Ltd, Atlantic Leader Shipping Co. Ltd, Cape Wind Trading Co. Ltd, Clipstone Navigation SA, Dawnlight Shipping Co. Ltd, Dzons Rids Shipping Co., Faroship Navigation Co. Ltd, Gaida Shipping Co., Gevostar Shipping Co. Ltd, Hose Marti Shipping Co., Imanta Shipping Co. Ltd, Kemeri Navigation Co., Klements Gotvalds Shipping Co., Latgale Shipping Co. Ltd, Limetree Shipping Co. Ltd, Majori Shipping Co. Ltd, Noella Marītime Co. Ltd, Razna Shipping Co., Sagewood Trading Inc., Samburga Shipping Co. Ltd, Saturn Trading Co., Taganroga Shipping Co., Talava Shipping Co. Ltd, Tangent Shipping Co. Ltd, Viktorio Shipping Co., Wilcox Holding Ltd, Zemgale Shipping Co. Ltd, Zoja Shipping Co. Ltd

Defendant: Aivars Lembergs

Operative part of the order

There is no need to give a ruling on the request for a preliminary ruling made by the Augstākās tiesas Senāts (Latvia) by decision of 12 June 2013.


(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.
Case T-495/12 to T-497/12: Judgment of the General Court of 5 June 2014  — European Drinks SA v OHIM — Alexandrion Grup Romania (Dracula Bite and DRACULA BITE) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative marks Dracula Bite and DRACULA BITE — Earlier national figurative mark Dracula — Absence of genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-06-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Romania, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014235EN.01001602.xml










21.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/16





Judgment of the General Court of 5 June 2014 — European Drinks SA v OHIM — Alexandrion Grup Romania (Dracula Bite and DRACULA BITE)
(Case T-495/12 to T-497/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative marks Dracula Bite and DRACULA BITE - Earlier national figurative mark Dracula - Absence of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2014/C 235/21
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Drinks SA (Ştei, Romania) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: SC Alexandrion Grup Romania Srl (Pleasa, Romania) (represented by: I. Niculeasa, G. Trantea and B. Mărculet, lawyers)

Re:

Three actions brought against three decisions of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 September 2012 (Cases R 680/2011-4, R 682/2011-4 and R 679/2011-4), concerning three opposition proceedings between European Drinks SA and SC Alexandrion Grup Romania Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Joins Cases T-495/12, T-496/12 and T-497/12 for the purposes of the judgment;










2)


Dismisses the actions;










3)


Orders European Drinks SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.