do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-402/14: Action brought on 6 June 2014  — FCC Aqualia v OHIM — Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona (AQUALOGY)
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, water treatment








C_2014261EN.01004001.xml










11.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 261/40





Action brought on 6 June 2014 — FCC Aqualia v OHIM — Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona (AQUALOGY)
(Case T-402/14)
2014/C 261/66
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: FCC Aqualia, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. de Oliveira Vaz Miranda de Sousa and N. González-Alberto Rodríguez, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul in part the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 13 March 2014 in Case R 1209/2013-1, and refuse registration of Community trade mark No 10 122 976 ‘AQUALOGY’ for services in Classes 35, 37, 39, 40 and 42 on the basis of the relative ground for refusal set out in Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


in the alternative, should the above form of order not be granted in its entirety, annul in part the contested decision on the basis of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009, in so far as that decision confirmed the rejection of the opposition against Community trade mark No 10 122 976 ‘AQUALOGY’ for services in Classes 35, 37, 39, 40 and 42, and refer the matter back to the Board of Appeal for the appeal to be examined once more in its entirety so far as the ground for refusal set out in the abovementioned article is concerned;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona, SA

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark including the word element ‘AQUALOGY’ for goods and services in Classes 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 17, 19, 27, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 10 122 976

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word mark ‘AQUALIA’ and national figurative mark including the word element ‘AQUALIA’ for goods and services in Classes 7, 9, 32, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009
Case T-404/14: Action brought on 6 June 2014  — Junited Autoglas Deutschland v OHIM — United Vehicles (UNITED VEHICLEs)
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014292EN.01004602.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/46





Action brought on 6 June 2014 — Junited Autoglas Deutschland v OHIM — United Vehicles (UNITED VEHICLEs)
(Case T-404/14)
2014/C 292/57
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Junited Autoglas Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: C. Weil, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: United Vehicles GmbH (Munich, Germany)

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 7 April 2014 in Case R 859/2013-4;










—


Uphold the appeal;










—


Uphold the opposition based on earlier Community trade mark No 6 0 25  399;










—


And dismiss the application for registration of the word mark ‘UNITED VEHICLES’;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: United Vehicles GmbH

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘UNITED VEHICLEs’ for services in Classes 35, 36, 38 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 1 0 3 30  041

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the word mark ‘Junited’ for goods and services in Classes 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 25, 26, 35, 36, 37 and 39 to 41

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014171EN.01000901.xml










6.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/9





Euro exchange rates (1)

5 June 2014
2014/C 171/02

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3567




JPY


Japanese yen


139,24




DKK


Danish krone


7,4626




GBP


Pound sterling


0,81030




SEK


Swedish krona


9,0285




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2200




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,1360




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,450




HUF


Hungarian forint


303,80




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1181




RON


Romanian leu


4,3920




TRY


Turkish lira


2,8606




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4608




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4842




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,5181




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6068




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7055




KRW


South Korean won


1 385,96




ZAR


South African rand


14,4935




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,4839




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5758




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 046,28




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3758




PHP


Philippine peso


59,290




RUB


Russian rouble


47,2404




THB


Thai baht


44,319




BRL


Brazilian real


3,0873




MXN


Mexican peso


17,4946




INR


Indian rupee


80,3058






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-397/14: Action brought on 6 June 2014  — Sociedad Española Inmuebles y Locales v Commission
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, equal treatment, hire purchase, infringement of EU law, principle of legal certainty, tax system








C_2014245EN.01003001.xml










28.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/30





Action brought on 6 June 2014 — Sociedad Española Inmuebles y Locales v Commission
(Case T-397/14)
2014/C 245/41
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Sociedad Española Inmuebles y Locales, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.C. García Muñoz, J.I. Jiménez-Blanco Carrillo de Albornoz and J. Corral García, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order the Commission to pay all the costs incurred in the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those put forward in Case T-392/14.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections  Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, Poland, State aid, control of State aid, silviculture, tax exemption








C_2014172EN.01001901.xml










6.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 172/19





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 TFEU
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty)
2014/C 172/02







Date of adoption of the decision


15.01.2014




Aid number


SA.37523 (2013/N)




Member State


Italy




Region


—


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Restoring forestry potential and introducing preventive actions N52D/2010




Legal basis


REGOLAMENTO (CE) n. 1698/2005
REGOLAMENTO (CE) N. 1974/2006
Misura 226 del PSR 2007 2013 della Regione Campania -CCI 2007IT06RPO019- originariamente approvato con Decisione n. C(2007)5712 del 20 novembre 2007 e nuovamente approvato con Decisione n. C(2012) 9747 del 19/12/2012
Lettera Commissione SG (2010) D/7528 del 31/05/2010
Legge regionale 11/96




Type of measure


Scheme


—




Objective


Forestry




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


—




Intensity


100 %




Duration (period)


15.01.2014 — 31.12.2014




Economic sectors


Forestry and logging




Name and address of the granting authority







Francesco Massaro




Regione Campania AdG PSR 2007-13 Centro Direzionale di Napoli- Isola A/6 80143 Napoli








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm.







Date of adoption of the decision


18.12.2013




Aid number


SA.37729 (2013/N)




Member State


Poland




Region


—


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Zwrot części podatku akcyzowego zawartego w cenie oleju napędowego




Legal basis


ustawa z dnia 10 marca 2006r. o zwrocie części podatku akcyzowego zawartego w cenie oleju napędowego wykorzystywanego do produkji rolnej(Dz. U. Nr 52, poz. 379, z późn. zm.)




Type of measure


Scheme


—




Objective


Tax exemptions under Directive 2003/96/EC




Form of aid


Other form of tax advantage




Budget


Overall budget: PLN 5 000 (in millions)
Annual budget: PLN 800 (in millions)




Intensity


%




Duration (period)


until 31.12.2014




Economic sectors


AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING




Name and address of the granting authority







Minister Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi




Ministerstwo Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi, ul. Wspólna 30, 00-930 Warszawa








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm.
Case C-279/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hannover (Germany) lodged on 6 June 2014  — Catharina Smets, Franciscus Vereijken v TUIfly GmbH
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airline, indemnification, strike, transport regulations, traveller








C_2014303EN.01001801.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/18





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hannover (Germany) lodged on 6 June 2014 — Catharina Smets, Franciscus Vereijken v TUIfly GmbH
(Case C-279/14)
2014/C 303/23
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Hannover

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Catharina Smets, Franciscus Vereijken

Defendant: TUIfly GmbH

Questions referred







1.


In the light of recital 15 in its preamble, is Regulation No 261/2004 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the occurrence of an exceptional circumstance — which leads the air carrier, after that circumstance has occurred, to deliberately reroute flights and to first reschedule those flights which were directly affected by the exceptional circumstance — can justify a delay within the meaning of Article 5 of that regulation and release the air carrier from its obligation to pay compensation under Article 5(1)(c) of Regulation No 261/2004 to the passenger whose flight was operated only after the exceptional circumstance had been dealt with and all flights could be rescheduled?










2.


In this context, is Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 to be interpreted as meaning that the air carrier which operates flights using a rotation procedure took all reasonable measures and is accordingly released from its obligation to pay compensation, when transporting passengers whose flight has already been significantly delayed due directly to an extraordinary circumstance, as a priority with aircraft which, in principle, are used differently in the rotation?










3.


Is recital 15 to be interpreted as meaning that only the aircraft directly affected by the strike, which is liable to affect one or more flights of that aircraft, may be affected by extraordinary circumstances, or does the circle of affected planes extend to several aircraft?










4.


In the context of reasonable measures within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004, is the airline permitted to use aircraft that are not affected in order to minimise the consequences of the strike for passengers who are directly affected and accordingly to spread the effects of a strike among several aircraft and passengers?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (Text with EEA relevance) — Commission Statement (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).
Call for applications 2014 — Third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, health care, invitation to tender








C_2014171EN.01001001.xml










6.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/10





Call for applications 2014
Third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 171/03
A call for applications ‘Health — 2014’ is launched today within the framework of the third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020) (1)

This call for applications consists of the following parts:






—


a call for proposals for the award of a financial contribution to specific actions in the form of project grants,










—


a call for proposals for the award of a financial contribution to functioning of non- governmental bodies (operating grants).




Deadlines for online submissions of the proposals are as follows, for project grants 25 September 2014, for the Framework Partnership Agreement for operating grants 25 September 2014 and 25 September 2014 for the application of the Specific Grant Agreement.
All the information, including the Commission Decision of 26 May 2014 on the adoption of the work programme for 2014 for implementation of the third Programme of the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020), and on the selection, award and other criteria for financial contributions to the actions of this programme, are available on the website of the Consumers, Health and Food Executive Agency Consumers (Chafea) at the following address:
http://ec.europa.eu/chafea/


(1)  Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 on the establishment of a third Programme for the Union’s action in the field of health (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1350/2007/EC (OJ L 86, 21.3.2014, p. 1).
Decision to close the formal investigation procedure after withdrawal by Member State — State aid — Portugal (Articles 107 to 109 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) — Commission notice pursuant to Article 108(2) of the TFEU — Withdrawal of notification — State aid SA.34764 (2012/C) — Regional aid for Europac Kraft Viana, SA  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Portugal, State aid, control of State aid, regional aid








C_2014171EN.01001401.xml










6.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/14





DECISION TO CLOSE THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE AFTER WITHDRAWAL BY MEMBER STATE
State aid — Portugal
(Articles 107 to 109 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union)
Commission notice pursuant to Article 108(2) of the TFEU — Withdrawal of notification
State aid SA.34764 (2012/C) — Regional aid for Europac Kraft Viana, SA
(Text with EEA relevance)
2014/C 171/05
The Commission has decided to close the formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) of the TFEU, initiated on 9 May 2012 (1) in respect of the measure referred to above, recording that Portugal has withdrawn its notification on 15 April 2014.


(1)  OJ C 395, 20.12.2012, p. 72.
Case T-412/14: Action brought on 6 June 2014  — Larko v Commission
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, privatisation, rights of the defence, seizure of goods








C_2014292EN.01004701.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/47





Action brought on 6 June 2014 — Larko v Commission
(Case T-412/14)
2014/C 292/58
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: Ι. Drullerakes, Ε. Τriandafyllou, G. Psaroudakis, Ε. Randos, Ν. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


uphold this action in its entirety;·










—


declare to be null and void the Commission Decision of 27/03/2014 [SG-Greffe (2014) D/4628/28/03/2014] in relation to the sale of certain assets of the applicant (No. SA.37954 (2013/N) and,










—


order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action the applicant relies on three pleas in law:






1.


The first plea in law is based on the infringement by the Commission of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The applicant maintains that due to the failure first to hear the applicant it is evident that the adoption of the contested decision was vitiated by an infringement of an essential procedural requirement for its adoption.










2.


The second plea in law is based on the infringement by the Commission of Article 108(2) TFEU and Article 14 of Regulation (ΕC) No 659/99. (1) The applicant maintains that the Commission committed a manifest error of assessment in considering that there was economic continuity between the applicant and the purchaser of its assets in the context of the ‘privatisation programme’.










3.


The third plea in law is based on the infringement of Article 296(2) TFEU. The applicant maintains that the statement of reasons in the contested decision is insufficient as regards the lack of economic continuity, and particularly as regards (a) the scope of the assets which were sold, (b) the non-transfer of employment contracts and (c) the economic logic of the sale.






(1)  Council Regulation (ΕC) No 659/1999 of 22 March1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1).
Case C-278/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia (Romania) lodged on 6 June 2014  — SC Enterprise Focused Solutions SRL v Spitalul Județean de Urgență Alba Iulia
Date: 2014-06-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: brand name, product quality, technical specification








C_2014303EN.01001701.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/17





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia (Romania) lodged on 6 June 2014 — SC Enterprise Focused Solutions SRL v Spitalul Județean de Urgență Alba Iulia
(Case C-278/14)
2014/C 303/22
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: SC Enterprise Focused Solutions SRL

Respondent: Spitalul Județean de Urgență Alba Iulia

Question referred

May Article 23(8) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 (1) be interpreted as meaning that, when a contracting authority defines the technical specifications of the product which is the subject of a procurement contract by reference to a particular brand, the characteristics of the ‘equivalent’ product offered must be established solely by reference to the technical specifications of products still in production, or may they be established by reference to products which are on the market but no longer in production?


(1)  Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).