do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-510/14: Action brought on 3 July 2014 — Staywell Hospitality Group v. OHIM — Sheraton International IP (PARK REGIS)
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, hotel industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014303EN.01004701.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/47





Action brought on 3 July 2014 — Staywell Hospitality Group v. OHIM — Sheraton International IP (PARK REGIS)
(Case T-510/14)
2014/C 303/55
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Staywell Hospitality Group Pty Ltd (Sydney, Australia) (represented by: D. Farnsworth, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sheraton International IP LLC (Stamford, United States of America)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 30 April 2014 in Cases R 240/2013-5 and R 303/2013-5 insofar as it concerns Case R 240/2013-5; and










—


condemn the Defendant to bear its own and pay the Applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark containing the word elements ‘PARK REGIS’ for services in Classes 35, 36 and 43 — Community trade mark application No 9 4 88  933

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Sheraton International IP LLC

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The figurative and word marks ‘ST. REGIS’ for services in Classes 36, 42 and 43, the international trade mark registration designating the European Union of the word mark ‘ST. REGIS’ for services in Class 36 as well as the well-known figurative and word marks ‘ST. REGIS’ in the European Union

Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was partially upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeals were dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8 (1) (b) of Regulation No 207/2009
Case C-165/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Stanislav Gross v Hauptzollamt Braunschweig (Taxation — Directive 92/12/EEC — Articles 7, 8 and 9 — General arrangements for products subject to excise duty — Products released for consumption in one Member State and held for commercial purposes in another Member State — Whether excise duty is chargeable to a person holding those products who has acquired them in the Member State of destination — Acquisition at the end of the entry process)
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, excise duty, trading operation








C_2014292EN.01000701.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/7





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Stanislav Gross v Hauptzollamt Braunschweig
(Case C-165/13) (1)

((Taxation - Directive 92/12/EEC - Articles 7, 8 and 9 - General arrangements for products subject to excise duty - Products released for consumption in one Member State and held for commercial purposes in another Member State - Whether excise duty is chargeable to a person holding those products who has acquired them in the Member State of destination - Acquisition at the end of the entry process))
2014/C 292/09
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Stanislav Gross

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Braunschweig

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9(1) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, as amended by Council Directive 92/108/EEC of 14 December 1992, read in conjunction with Article 7 of that directive, must be interpreted as allowing a Member State to designate as liable to excise duty a person who holds for commercial purposes, on the fiscal territory of that State, products subject to excise duty that have been released for consumption in another Member State, in circumstances such as those of the case before the referring court, even though that person was not the first holder of those products in the Member State of destination.


(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 399/2014 of 22 April 2014 concerning the authorisation of the preparations of Lactobacillus brevis DSM 23231, Lactobacillus brevis DSMZ 16680, Lactobacillus plantarum CECT 4528 and Lactobacillus fermentum NCIMB 30169 as feed additives for all animal species ( OJ L 119, 23.4.2014 )
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: animal feedingstuffs, food additive, food safety, market approval








L_2014196EN.01004401.xml










3.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 196/44







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 399/2014 of 22 April 2014 concerning the authorisation of the preparations of Lactobacillus brevis DSM 23231, Lactobacillus brevis DSMZ 16680, Lactobacillus plantarum CECT 4528 and Lactobacillus fermentum NCIMB 30169 as feed additives for all animal species

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 119 of 23 April 2014
)


On pages 42 and 43 in the Annex, in the first column ‘Identification number of the additive’:
for:

               ‘1k20736’,
read:

               ‘1k20744’;
for:

               ‘1k20737’,
read:

               ‘1k20745’;
for:

               ‘1k20738’,
read:

               ‘1k20746’;
for:

               ‘1k20739’,
read:

               ‘1k20747’.
Case C-102/13 P: Order of the Court of 3 July 2014 — Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission (Appeal — Action for annulment — Period for bringing proceedings — Validity of the notification of a Commission decision to the Permanent Representation of a Member State — Determination of the date of that notification — Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Article 181 — Appeal manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, application of EU law, interpretation of the law, principle of legal certainty, tax exemption








C_2014315EN.01002702.xml










15.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 315/27





Order of the Court of 3 July 2014 — Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission
(Case C-102/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Action for annulment - Period for bringing proceedings - Validity of the notification of a Commission decision to the Permanent Representation of a Member State - Determination of the date of that notification - Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Article 181 - Appeal manifestly unfounded))
2014/C 315/42
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T.Henze and J. Möller, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Sauer and T. Maxian Rusche, Agents)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 164, 8 June 2013.
Case C-524/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Karlsruhe — Germany) — Eycke Braun v Land Baden-Württemberg (Request for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Directive 69/335/EEC — Indirect taxes on the raising of capital — Article 10(c) — Conversion of a capital company into a different type of capital company not involving any increase in capital — Fees demanded for the drawing up of a notarial act recording that conversion)
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: capital movement, company law, indirect tax, share capital








C_2014292EN.01001001.xml










1.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/10





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Karlsruhe — Germany) — Eycke Braun v Land Baden-Württemberg
(Case C-524/13) (1)

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Directive 69/335/EEC - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Article 10(c) - Conversion of a capital company into a different type of capital company not involving any increase in capital - Fees demanded for the drawing up of a notarial act recording that conversion))
2014/C 292/12
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Karlsruhe

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Eycke Braun

Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Operative part of the judgment

Article 10(c) of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides that the Treasury is to receive a share of the fees charged by a notary employed as a civil servant when he draws up a notarial act recording a transaction concerning the conversion of a capital company into a different type of capital company, and which does not lead to an increase in the capital of the company making the acquisition or changing its legal form.


(1)  OJ C 367, 14.12.2013.
Case C-320/14 P: Appeal brought on 3 July 2014 by Asos plc against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 29 April 2014 in Case T-647/11: Asos plc v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015127EN.01000602.xml










20.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 127/6





Appeal brought on 3 July 2014 by Asos plc against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 29 April 2014 in Case T-647/11: Asos plc v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-320/14 P)
(2015/C 127/09)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Asos plc (represented by: P. Kavanagh, Solicitor, A. Lykiardopoulos QC, A. Edwards-Stuart, Barrister)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Roger Maier
By order of 13 January 2015 the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) has dismissed the appeal and ordered Asos plc to bear its own costs.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7230 — Bekaert/Pirelli Steel Tyre Cord Business)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, metallurgical industry, pneumatic tyre, processing industry








C_2014207EN.01004601.xml










3.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/46





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7230 — Bekaert/Pirelli Steel Tyre Cord Business)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 207/09)






1.


On 24 June 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking NV Bekaert SA (‘Bekaert’, Belgium) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the steel tyre cord business of Pirelli Tyre SpA (‘Pirelli’s steel tyre cord business’, Italy) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Bekaert: production and marketing of a wide range of products in the areas of drawn steel wire products, advanced metal transformation, advanced materials and coatings,
—   for Pirelli’s steel tyre cord business: supply of steel tyre cord.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










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 e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7230 — Bekaert/Pirelli Steel Tyre Cord Business, 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’).
Notice of open competitions
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, competition (EU), translation








C_2014207EN.01004501.xml










3.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/45





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITIONS
(2014/C 207/08)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competitions:
EPSO/AD/284/14 — GERMAN-LANGUAGE (DE) TRANSLATORS
EPSO/AD/285/14 — GREEK-LANGUAGE (EL) TRANSLATORS
EPSO/AD/286/14 — SPANISH-LANGUAGE (ES) TRANSLATORS
EPSO/AD/287/14 — SWEDISH-LANGUAGE (SV) TRANSLATORS
The competition notice is published in 24 languages in Official Journal C 207 A of 3 July 2014.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/
Case C-92/14: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Câmpulung — Romania) — Liliana Tudoran, Florin Iulian Tudoran, Ilie Tudoran v SC Suport Colect SRL Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directives 93/13/EEC and 2008/48/EC — Temporal and material scope — Facts preceding the accession of Romania to the European Union — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Implementation of EU law — Failure to implement Union law — Manifest lack of jurisdiction — Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU — Manifest inadmissibility
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Romania, accession to the European Union, application of EU law, consumer credit, consumer protection, jurisdiction ratione materiae, unfair terms of contract








C_2014315EN.01003301.xml










15.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 315/33





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Câmpulung — Romania) — Liliana Tudoran, Florin Iulian Tudoran, Ilie Tudoran v SC Suport Colect SRL
(Case C-92/14) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directives 93/13/EEC and 2008/48/EC - Temporal and material scope - Facts preceding the accession of Romania to the European Union - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Implementation of EU law - Failure to implement Union law - Manifest lack of jurisdiction - Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU - Manifest inadmissibility)
2014/C 315/53
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Judecătoria Câmpulung

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Liliana Tudoran, Florin Iulian Tudoran, Ilie Tudoran

Defendant: SC Suport Colect SRL

Operative part of the order

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts and Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC are not applicable to the dispute in the main proceedings.
In addition, firstly, the Court of Justice of the European Union manifestly lacks jurisdiction to answer the third question referred for a preliminary ruling by the Judecătoria Câmpulung (Romania) by decision of 25 February 2014; secondly, the fifth question referred for a preliminary ruling by that court is manifestly inadmissible.


(1)  OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
State aid — Decision to raise no objections
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Iceland, State aid, control of State aid, metallurgical industry, regional development








C_2014207EN.01004201.xml










3.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/42





State aid — Decision to raise no objections
(2014/C 207/05)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following State aid measure:








Date of adoption of the decision



:


12 March 2014





Case number



:


74081





Decision number



:


111/14/COL





EFTA State



:


Iceland





Region



:


Norðurþing Municipality in north-east Iceland





Title



:


Construction of PCC Silicon Metal Plant at Bakki





Legal basis



:


Act No 52/2013 which authorises the Minister of Industry and Innovation in Iceland, on behalf of the Treasury, to enter into an Investment Agreement with the company PCC on measures for the construction of a silicon metal plant





Objective



:


Regional development





Form of aid



:


Direct cash grant for site preparation
Fixed land lease for 10 years
Exemptions and discounts from taxes and charges





Budget



:


EUR 23,3 million in nominal terms





Duration



:


1 January 2014-27 September 2027





Economic sector



:


Silicon Metal





Name and address of the granting authority



:







Ministry of Industry and Innovation




Skúlagötu 4




101 Reykjavík




ICELAND




and





Norðurþing Municipality




Ketilsbraut 7-9




640 Húsavík




ICELAND








The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:
http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/
Case T-16/11: Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2014  — Netherlands v Commission (EAGGF — Guarantee Section — EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Expenditure in the context of the European quota system in relation to the production of potato starch — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, common agricultural policy








C_2014282EN.01002502.xml










25.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/25





Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2014 — Netherlands v Commission
(Case T-16/11) (1)

((EAGGF - Guarantee Section - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure in the context of the European quota system in relation to the production of potato starch - Rights of the defence))
2014/C 282/32
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels, M. de Ree, M. Noort, M. Bulterman and J. Langer, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Kranenborg, F. Wilman and P. Rossi, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and J. Möller, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2010/668/EU of 4 November 2010 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2010 L 288, p. 24) in so far as it applies a financial correction to the Kingdom of the Netherlands in the context of the European quota system in relation to the production of potato starch for 2003 to 2008 in the total amount of EUR 2 8 9 47  149.31.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision 2010/668/EU of 4 November 2010 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) in so far as it applies a financial correction to the Kingdom of the Netherlands in the context of the European quota system in relation to the production of potato starch for 2003 to 2008;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 72, 5.3.2011.
Special Report No 5/2014 ‘European banking supervision taking shape — EBA and its changing context’
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU office or agency, banking, financial control








C_2014207EN.01004101.xml










3.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/41





Special Report No 5/2014 ‘European banking supervision taking shape — EBA and its changing context’
(2014/C 207/04)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 5/2014 ‘European banking supervision taking shape — EBA and its changing context’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:





European Court of Auditors




Publications (PUB)




12, rue Alcide De Gasperi




1615 Luxembourg




LUXEMBOURG




Tel. +352 4398-1




e-mail: eca-info@eca.europa.eu




or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.
Verbatim report of proceedings of 3 July 2014
Date: 2014-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, parliamentary debate








C_2022332EN.01009201.xml










31.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 332/92






3 July 2014VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF 3 JULY 2014
(2022/C 332/03)
Contents







1.

Opening of the sitting
93










2.

Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
93










3.

Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity : see Minutes
93










4.

Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
93










5.

Implementing measures (Rule 106): see Minutes
93










6.

Petitions: see Minutes
93










7.

Transfers of appropriations: see Minutes
93










8.

Voting time : see Minutes
93










9.

Documents received: see Minutes
93










10.

Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting: see Minutes
93










11.

Dates of forthcoming sittings: see Minutes
93










12.

Adjournment of the session
93




Verbatim report of proceedings of 3 July 2014


VORSITZ: MARTIN SCHULZ


Präsident

1.   Opening of the sitting

(Die Sitzung wird um 10.00 Uhr eröffnet.)

2.   Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting: see Minutes
3.   Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity : see Minutes
4.   Composition of Parliament: see Minutes
5.   Implementing measures (Rule 106): see Minutes
6.   Petitions: see Minutes
7.   Transfers of appropriations: see Minutes
8.   Voting time : see Minutes
9.   Documents received: see Minutes
10.   Forwarding of texts adopted during the sitting: see Minutes
11.   Dates of forthcoming sittings: see Minutes
12.   Adjournment of the session

Der Präsident. - Ich erkläre die Sitzungsperiode des Europäischen Parlaments für unterbrochen.

(Die Sitzung wird um 10.05 Uhr geschlossen.)