do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1051/2014 of 2 October 2014 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Pomelo de Corse (PGI))
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Corsica, France, citrus fruit, designation of origin, labelling, product designation








L_2014292EN.01000101.xml










8.10.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 292/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 1051/2014
of 2 October 2014
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Pomelo de Corse (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, France's application to register the name ‘Pomelo de Corse’ 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 ‘Pomelo de Corse’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Pomelo de Corse’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


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, 2 October 2014.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOȘ
            

Member of the Commission






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

(2)  
            OJ C 125, 26.4.2014, p. 15.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Opinion of the European Central Bank of 2 October 2014 on the publication of the annual percentage rate of charge for consumer credit agreements (CON/2014/71)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: Estonia, arbitration, central bank, consumer credit, disclosure of information, national law

EN 

ECB-PUBLIC 

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK 

of 2 October 2014  

on the publication of the annual percentage rate of  

charge for consumer credit agreements 

 (CON/2014/71) 

Introduction and legal basis 

On 27 August 2014, the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Ministry of Justice of 

Estonia for an opinion on the law amending the Code of Civil Procedure, the Law on obligations and the 

General Part of the Civil Code (hereinafter the ‘draft law’). 

The ECB’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Articles 127(4) and 282(5) of the Treaty on the 
Functioning of the European Union and the third indent of Article 2(1) of Council Decision 98/415/EC1, 

as the draft law relates to Eesti Pank. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of 

Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion. 

1.  

Purpose of the draft law 

The draft law relates to Eesti Pank’s obligation to publish the annual percentage rate of charge (APRC) of 

consumer credit biannually. The primary aim of the draft law is consumer protection. The draft law also 

eliminates arbitration as a mechanism for dispute resolution for consumer credit agreements and sets the 

statutory upper limit for the APRC. The Supreme Court of Estonia has also pointed out the need for this 
amendment2. 

2. 

General observations 

Eesti Pank is currently calculating and publishing the APRC on its website on a monthly basis. The ECB 

has  no  concerns  with  regard  to  the  proposed  amendment  to  publish  the  APRC  biannually  and  has  no 

1  

2  

Council Decision 98/415/EC of 29 June 1998 on the consultation of the European Central Bank by national authorities 
regarding draft legislative provisions (OJ L 189, 3.7.1998, p. 42). 

  Point 25 of the Supreme Court Ruling 3-2-1-186-13, published on the Supreme Court’s webpage at www.riigikohus.ee.  

 
 
 
 
                                                 
ECB-PUBLIC 

comments on the other changes introduced by the draft law. 

This opinion will be published on the ECB’s website. 

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 2 October 2014. 

[signed] 

The President of the ECB 

Mario DRAGHI 

2
Case T-447/13 P: Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Marcuccio v Commisison (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Reimbursement of recoverable costs — Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal — Availability of a parallel remedy — Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, enforcement of ruling, legal expenses, redemption








C_2014421EN.01004302.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/43





Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Marcuccio v Commisison
(Case T-447/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Reimbursement of recoverable costs - Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal - Availability of a parallel remedy - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded))
2014/C 421/61
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: initially, C. Berardis-Kayser and J. Banquero Cruz, and subsequently C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (single judge) of 18 June 2013 in Case F-143/11 Marcuccio v Commission, ECR-SC, EU:F:2013:81, seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Luigi Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission in the present case.






(1)  OJ C 291, 5.10.2013.
Case T-230/13: Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — HTC Sweden v OHIM — Vermop Salmon (TWISTER) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Withdrawal of application for declaration of invalidity — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014431EN.01002201.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/22





Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — HTC Sweden v OHIM — Vermop Salmon (TWISTER)
(Case T-230/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Withdrawal of application for declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate))
(2014/C 431/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: HTC Sweden AB (Söderköping, Sweden) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt and D. Kipping, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Vermop Salmon GmbH (Gilching, Germany) (represented by: M. Ring and W. von der Osten-Sacken, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 31 January 2013 (joined cases R 1873/2011-1 and R 1881/2011-1) relating to invalidity proceedings between Vermop Salmon GmbH and HTC Sweden AB.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the defendant.






(1)  OJ C 178, 22.6.2013.
Case T-622/13: Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile v OHIM — Norwood Promotional Products Europe (NORTHWOOD professional forest equipment)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, machine-tool industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014431EN.01004502.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/45





Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile v OHIM — Norwood Promotional Products Europe (NORTHWOOD professional forest equipment)
(Case T-622/13) (1)

(2014/C 431/71)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
Case T-592/13: Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile v OHIM — Norwood Industries (NORTHWOOD professional forest equipment)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic commerce, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014431EN.01004501.xml










1.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/45





Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Ratioparts-Ersatzteile v OHIM — Norwood Industries (NORTHWOOD professional forest equipment)
(Case T-592/13) (1)

(2014/C 431/70)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
Case C-426/12: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — X v Voorzitter van het managementteam van het onderdeel Belastingdienst/Z van de rijksbelastingdienst (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2003/96/EC — Taxation of energy products and electricity — Article 2(4)(b) — Dual use of energy products — Concept)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: dual-use good, electrical energy, energy-generating product, tax system








C_2014421EN.01000302.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/3





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — X v Voorzitter van het managementteam van het onderdeel Belastingdienst/Z van de rijksbelastingdienst
(Case C-426/12) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2003/96/EC - Taxation of energy products and electricity - Article 2(4)(b) - Dual use of energy products - Concept))
2014/C 421/04
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Gerechtshof te ’s-Hertogenbosch

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: X

Respondent: Voorzitter van het managementteam van het onderdeel Belastingdienst/Z van de rijksbelastingdienst

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 2(4)(b) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, as amended by Council Directive 2004/74/EC of 29 April 2004, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact of using, firstly, coal as a heating fuel in the sugar production process and, secondly, carbon dioxide generated by the combustion of that energy product to produce chemical fertilizers does not constitute ‘dual use’ of that energy product within the meaning of that provision.
However, the fact of using, firstly, coal as a heating fuel in the sugar production process and, secondly, carbon dioxide generated by the combustion of that energy product for the purposes of the same production process does constitute such ‘dual use’ if it is established that the sugar production process cannot be completed without using the carbon dioxide generated by the combustion of the coal.










2.


A Member State is entitled to apply, in its national law, a more restrictive scope of the concept of ‘dual use’ than that which it has under the second indent of Article 2(4)(b) of Directive 2003/96, as amended by Directive 2004/74, in order to levy a tax on energy products excluded from the scope of that directive.






(1)  OJ C 399, 22.12.2012.
Case C-91/14 P: Appeal brought on 21 February 2014 by Przedsiębiorstwo Handlowe Medox Lepiarz Jarosław Lepiarz Alicja sp. j. against the judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2013 in Case T-591/11 Przedsiębiorstwo Handlowe Medox Lepiarz Jarosław Lepiarz v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Henkel
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, adhesive, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014462EN.01001101.xml










22.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/11





Appeal brought on 21 February 2014 by Przedsiębiorstwo Handlowe Medox Lepiarz Jarosław Lepiarz Alicja sp. j. against the judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2013 in Case T-591/11 Przedsiębiorstwo Handlowe Medox Lepiarz Jarosław Lepiarz v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Henkel
(Case C-91/14 P)
(2014/C 462/17)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Appellant: Przedsiębiorstwo Handlowe Medox Lepiarz Jarosław Lepiarz Alicja sp. j. (represented by: M. Konieczyński and I. Kubiec, adwokaci)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Henkel Corp.
By order of 2 October 2014, the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal in its entirety, in part as being inadmissible, and ordered Przedsiębiorstwo Handlowe Medox Lepiarz Jarosław Lepiarz Alicja sp. j. to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Case C-457/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Cagliari (Italy) lodged on 2 October 2014  — Criminal proceedings against Claudia Concu and Isabella Melis
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, freedom to provide services, invitation to tender, right of establishment








C_2014439EN.01002401.xml










8.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 439/24





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Cagliari (Italy) lodged on 2 October 2014 — Criminal proceedings against Claudia Concu and Isabella Melis
(Case C-457/14)
(2014/C 439/32)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale ordinario di Cagliari

Parties to the main proceedings

Claudia Concu and Isabella Melis

Questions referred







1)


Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU and the principles laid down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in [Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10 Costa and Cifone [2012] ECR I-0000] to be interpreted as precluding a call for tenders for the award of licences with a period of validity shorter than that of licences awarded in the past, where that tendering procedure has been launched in order to remedy the consequences of the unlawful exclusion of a certain number of operators from earlier tendering procedures?










2)


Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU and the principles laid down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Costa and Cifone to be interpreted as precluding the possibility that sufficient justification for the shorter period of validity of licences offered for tender, as compared with licences awarded in the past, can be found in the requirement for the licensing system to be reorganised through the alignment of licence expiry dates?
Case C-254/13: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Orgacom BVBA v Vlaamse Landmaatschappij (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Charges having equivalent effect to customs duties — Internal taxes — Import levy on manure imported into the Flanders Region — Articles 30 TFEU and 110 TFEU — Levy payable by the importer — Different levies on imported manure and manure produced within the Flanders Region)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, Flanders (Belgium), customs duties, import (EU), import tax, organic fertiliser








C_2014421EN.01001201.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/12





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 2 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Orgacom BVBA v Vlaamse Landmaatschappij
(Case C-254/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Charges having equivalent effect to customs duties - Internal taxes - Import levy on manure imported into the Flanders Region - Articles 30 TFEU and 110 TFEU - Levy payable by the importer - Different levies on imported manure and manure produced within the Flanders Region))
2014/C 421/15
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Orgacom BVBA

Respondent: Vlaamse Landmaatschappij

Operative part of the judgment

Article 30 TFEU precludes a levy, such as that provided for under Article 21(5) of the Decree of the Flanders Region of 23 January 1991 on protection of the environment against fertiliser pollution, as amended by the Decree of 28 March 2003, which is applicable only to imports into the Flanders Region of surplus livestock manure and other fertilisers, which is levied on the importer whereas the tax on the surplus manure produced within the territory of the Flanders Region is levied on the producer and is calculated differently from the tax on imports. In that regard, it is immaterial that the Member State from which the surplus manure is imported into the Flanders Region provides for a tax reduction in the case of export of that surplus to other Member States.


(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
Case T-215/12: Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014  — MPM-Quality and Eutech v OHIM — Elton Hodinářská (MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community figurative mark MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949 — Earlier international and national marks PRIM — Bad faith — Article 165(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Articles 41 and 56 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Lack of genuine use of the earlier mark — Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014421EN.01004201.xml










24.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 421/42





Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — MPM-Quality and Eutech v OHIM — Elton Hodinářská (MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949)
(Case T-215/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949 - Earlier international and national marks PRIM - Bad faith - Article 165(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Articles 41 and 56 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Lack of genuine use of the earlier mark - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
2014/C 421/59
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicants: MPM-Quality v.o.s. (Frýdek-Místek, Czech Republic); and Eutech a.s. (Šternberk, Czech Republic) (represented by: M. Kyjovský, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Gája and D. Botis, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Elton Hodinářská a.s. (Nové Mesto nad Metují, Czech Republic) (represented by: T. Matoušek, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 March 2012 (Case R 826/2010-4) relating to invalidity proceedings between (i) MPM-Quality v.o.s. and Eutech a.s. and (ii) Elton Hodinářská a.s.

Operative part of the order


The Court:







1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders MPM-Quality v.o.s. and Eutech a.s to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
Case T-340/07 RENV: Judgment of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission (Arbitration clause — Contract relating to Community financial support for a project in the framework of the ‘eContent’ programme — Termination of the contract by the Commission — Reimbursement of eligible costs)
Date: 2014-10-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, arbitration clause, financial aid, information society, multilingualism, reimbursement of aid








C_2014395EN.01003101.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/31






Judgment of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission
(Case T-340/07 RENV) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Contract relating to Community financial support for a project in the framework of the ‘eContent’ programme - Termination of the contract by the Commission - Reimbursement of eligible costs))
(2014/C 395/35)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: E. Manhaeve and M. Wilderspin, then by M. Wilderspin, S. Delaude and L. Cappeletti and lastly by S. Delaude and L. Cappeletti, acting as Agents, and by D. Philippe and M. Gouden, lawyers)

Re:

Action on the basis of an arbitration clause, seeking an order that the Commission pay (i) the sums allegedly due to the applicant and (ii) damages, following termination of a contract relating to Community financial support for the project ‘e Content Exposure and Business Opportunities’ (Contract No EDC-53007 EEBO/27873), concluded in the framework of the multiannual Community programme to stimulate the development and use of European digital content on the global networks and to promote linguistic diversity in the information society.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders the European Commission to pay Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE the sum of EUR 8 843,10;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the European Commission to pay 5 % of its own costs and 5 % of the costs of Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis, and the latter to pay 95 % of its own costs and 95 % of the Commission’s costs.






(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.