do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-791/14: Action brought on 4 December 2014  — Bensarsa v European Commission and EDPS
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: data protection, data transmission, dissemination of information, personal data








C_2015034EN.01004301.xml










2.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 34/43





Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Bensarsa v European Commission and EDPS
(Case T-791/14)
(2015/C 034/51)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Faouzi Bensarsa (Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: S.A. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission and European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of 25 February 2014 adopted by the Security Directorate;










—


Annul the decision of 24 October 2014 impliedly adopted by the EDPS;










—


Order the defendants to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging a failure to state reasons for the Commission’s decision of 25 February 2014.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging a failure to state reasons for the decision of the EDPS, since it was implied and its reasons could not be deduced either from its context or the decision of 25 February 2014.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 (1).
The applicant argues that the lack of response from the EDPS constitutes a breach of the duty to inform the data subject, provided for in Articles 46(a) and 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ 2001 L 8, p. 1).
Review of ‘Competition’ C A Official Journals
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: Provisional data
Subjects: EU Official Journal, administrative competition, job vacancy








CA2014434EN.01001101.xml










4.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 434/11





REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OFFICIAL JOURNALS
(2014/C 434 A/02)
Please find below the list of C A Official Journals published during the present year.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Official Journals are published in all language versions.






5


 




6


 




11


 




19


 




21


 




26


 




27


 




30


(PL)




35


 




41


(DE/EN/FR)




42


 




43


 




46


 




47


 




48


 




55


 




56


 




60


 




62


 




65


 




73


(DE/EN/FR)




74


 




81


 




88


 




92


(DE/EN/FR)




97


 




98


 




99


 




108


 




109


 




116


 




119


 




133


 




134


 




136


 




137


(DE/EN/FR)




140


 




145


 




152


 




160


 




163


 




164


 




176


 




178


 




180


 




182


 




185


 




186


 




188


 




195


 




207


 




209


(DE/EN/FR)




211


 




217


 




219


 




242


 




254


 




255


 




256


(LV)




258


(RO)




262


(EN)




267


(SL)




270


(FR)




272


(DA)




274


(IT)




277


 




283


 




289


(DE/EN/FR)




293


(NL)




295


(MT)




297


 




299


 




304


 




321


(DE/EN/FR)




325


(SL)




332


 




334


 




340


 




342


(EN)




352


 




354


 




358


 




366


 




376


 




378


(SV)




381


 




384


 




385


(PT)




390


(HR)




391


 




410


 




412


 




425


(EN/IT/LT)




427


 




432


 




433


(DE)




434
Case C-259/14 P: Appeal brought on 23 May 2014 by ADR Center Srl against the order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 23 March 2014 in Case T-110/14: ADR Center Srl v European Commission
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arbitration, audit, payment, redemption








C_2015046EN.01001701.xml










9.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/17





Appeal brought on 23 May 2014 by ADR Center Srl against the order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 23 March 2014 in Case T-110/14: ADR Center Srl v European Commission
(Case C-259/14 P)
(2015/C 046/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: ADR Center Srl (represented by: L. Tantalo, advocate, G. De Palo, advocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
By order of 4 December 2014 the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.
Case T-802/14: Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Laboratorios ERN v OHIM — michelle menard (Lenah.C)
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015046EN.01005802.xml










9.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 46/58





Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Laboratorios ERN v OHIM — michelle menard (Lenah.C)
(Case T-802/14)
(2015/C 046/75)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Laboratorios ERN, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: michelle menard GmbH — Berlin cosmetics (Berlin, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Lenah.C’ — Application for registration No 10 426 617

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 September 2014 in Case R 2260/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM and, if applicable, the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs (jointly and severally).





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-793/14: Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Tempus Energy and Tempus Energy Technology v Commission
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: United Kingdom, energy industry, equal treatment, judicial inquiry, principle of proportionality








C_2015081EN.01002102.xml










9.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 81/21





Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Tempus Energy and Tempus Energy Technology v Commission
(Case T-793/14)
(2015/C 081/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Tempus Energy Ltd (Reading, United Kingdom); and Tempus Energy Technology Ltd (Cheltenham, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Derenne, J. Blockx, C. Ziegler and M. Kinsella, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision; and










—


order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicants.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By their action the applicants seek the annulment of the Commission’s Decision C(2014) 5083 final of 23 July 2014 in case SA.35980 (2014/N-2) — United Kingdom, Electricity Market Reform — Capacity Market.
In support of the action, the applicants rely on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that, by failing to open the formal investigation procedure, the Commission violated Article 108(2) TFEU, the principles of non-discrimination, proportionality and legitimate expectation and made a wrong assessment of the facts. The applicants submit that:






—


the Commission failed to properly assess the potential role of Demand-Side Response (‘DSR’) in the UK capacity market;










—


the restrictions on the duration of DSR contracts under the capacity market violate the principles of legitimate expectation and non-discrimination, and are based on a wrong assessment of the facts;










—


the requirement for DSR operators to choose between transitional and enduring market auctions violates the principles of legitimate expectation and non-discrimination;










—


the capacity market’s cost recovery methodology violates the principles of non-discrimination, legitimate expectation and proportionality;










—


the use of open-ended capacity events rather than time-bound ones in the enduring auctions of the capacity market is contrary to the principles of non-discrimination and legitimate expectation;










—


the capacity market’s bid bond requirement to obtain access to the auctions violates the principles of non-discrimination and legitimate expectation; and










—


the capacity market’s failure to provide for additional remuneration for savings in transmission and distribution losses from DSR violates the principles of non-discrimination and legitimate expectation.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commissions failed to provide adequate reasoning in the Decision.
Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2014/767/EU of 23 July 2013 on the State aid SA.35062 (13/N-2) implemented by Portugal for Caixa Geral de Depósitos ( OJ L 323, 7.11.2014 )
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Portugal, State aid, aid to undertakings, bank, company in difficulties, control of State aid








L_2014348EN.01003002.xml










4.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 348/30







Corrigendum to Commission Decision 2014/767/EU of 23 July 2013 on the State aid SA.35062 (13/N-2) implemented by Portugal for Caixa Geral de Depósitos

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 323 of 7 November 2014
)


On the cover and on page 19:
for:


                           ‘Commission Decision 2014/767/EU of 23 July 2013 on the State aid SA.35062 (13/N-2) implemented by Portugal for Caixa Geral de Depósitos’
                        
,read:


                           ‘Commission Decision 2014/767/EU of 24 July 2013 on the State aid SA.35062 (13/N-2) implemented by Portugal for Caixa Geral de Depósitos’
                        
;on page 32:
for:


                     ‘Done at Brussels, 23 July 2013.’
                  
,read:


                     ‘Done at Brussels, 24 July 2013.’
                  
.
Case T-595/13: Judgment of the General Court of 4 December 2014  — BSH v OHIM — LG Electronics (compressor technology) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark compressor technology — Earlier national word marks KOMPRESSOR — Relative ground for refusal — Partial refusal to register — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electrical engineering, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015026EN.01002702.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/27





Judgment of the General Court of 4 December 2014 — BSH v OHIM — LG Electronics (compressor technology)
(Case T-595/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark compressor technology - Earlier national word marks KOMPRESSOR - Relative ground for refusal - Partial refusal to register - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 026/33)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Biagosch, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Fischer and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, South Korea)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 September 2013 (Case R 1176/2012-1), concerning opposition proceedings between LG Electronics, Inc. and BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
Joined Cases T-494/13 and T-495/13: Judgment of the General Court of 4 December 2014  — Sales & Solutions v OHIM — Inceda (WATT and WATT) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community figurative trade mark Watt and Community word mark Watt — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, energy industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015026EN.01002701.xml










26.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/27





Judgment of the General Court of 4 December 2014 — Sales & Solutions v OHIM — Inceda (WATT and WATT)
(Joined Cases T-494/13 and T-495/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative trade mark Watt and Community word mark Watt - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 026/32)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Sales & Solutions GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: K. Gründig-Schnelle, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Inceda Holding GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: J. Wald and D. Thrun, lawyers)

Re:

In Case T-494/13, action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 July 2013 (Case R 1192/2012-4), and, in Case T-495/13, action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 July 2013 (Case R 1193/2012-4), concerning invalidity proceedings between Inceda Holding GmbH and Sales & Solutions GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders Sales & Solutions GmbH to bear its own costs as well as those of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and of Inceda Holding GmbH in Joined Cases T-494/13 and T-495/13.






(1)  OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.
Notice of open competition
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: EPSO, European Parliament, administrative personnel, assistant, competition (EU)








C_2014434EN.01000801.xml










4.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 434/8





Notice of open competition
(2014/C 434/06)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:
EPSO/AST/134/14 — Assistants (AST 3) in the field of parliamentary work
The competition notice is published in 24 languages in Official Journal C 434 A of 4 December 2014.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/
2014/886/EU: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2014 appointing the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: European Data Protection Supervisor, appointment of members








L_2014351EN.01000901.xml










9.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 351/9








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
         
of 4 December 2014
         
appointing the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor

(2014/886/EU)



THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (1), and in particular Article 42(1) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of a list of candidates drawn up by the European Commission on 16 September 2014, in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, following a public call for candidates, with a view to the appointment of the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor,

Whereas:







(1)


The term of office of the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor came to an end on 16 January 2014. However, in accordance with Article 42(6) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor remain in office until they are replaced.












(2)


The European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor are to be appointed by common accord between the European Parliament and the Council, for a period of five years from 4 December 2014,





HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following are appointed for the period from 4 December 2014 to 5 December 2019:






—


European Data Protection Supervisor: Mr Giovanni BUTTARELLI,










—


Assistant Supervisor: Mr Wojciech Rafał WIEWIÓROWSKI.






Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on 4 December 2014.




Done at Brussels, 4 December 2014.


For the European Parliament


The President

M. SCHULZ
            



For the Council


The President

S. GOZI
            





(1)  
            OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.
Case T-804/14: Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Ogrodnik v OHIM — Aviário Tropical (Tropical)
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, animal nutrition, animal welfare, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015065EN.01003901.xml










23.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/39





Action brought on 4 December 2014 — Ogrodnik v OHIM — Aviário Tropical (Tropical)
(Case T-804/14)
(2015/C 065/54)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Tadeusz Ogrodnik (Chorzów, Poland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aviário Tropical, SA (Loures, Portugal)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: figurative mark in black and white containing the word element ‘Tropical’ — Community trade mark No 3 435 773

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 September 2014 in Case R 1948/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM and the other party to proceedings, should it intervene, to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) in conjunction with 53(1)(a) and Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-165/13: Order of the General Court of 4 December 2014  — Talanton v Commission (Arbitration clause — Pocemon and Perform contracts concluded as part of the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration (2007-2013) — Eligible costs — Repayment of sums paid — Audit report — No interest in bringing proceedings — Interest in seeking a declaration — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, arbitration clause, audit, expenditure, redemption








C_2015056EN.01001801.xml










16.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 56/18





Order of the General Court of 4 December 2014 — Talanton v Commission
(Case T-165/13) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Pocemon and Perform contracts concluded as part of the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration (2007-2013) - Eligible costs - Repayment of sums paid - Audit report - No interest in bringing proceedings - Interest in seeking a declaration - Inadmissibility))
(2015/C 056/24)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Talanton AE — Symvouleftiki-Ekpaideftiki Etaireia Dianomon, Parochis Ypiresion Marketing kai Dioikisis Epicheiriseon (Palaio Faliro, Greece) (represented by: M. Angelopoulos and K. Damis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and A. Sauka, acting as Agents, and L. Athanassiou and G. Gerapetritis, lawyers)

Re:

ACTION based on Article 272 TFEU and the first paragraph of Article 340 TFEU seeking a declaration by the Court, first, that the refusal by the Commission to allow as eligible costs certain sums paid to the applicant by way of the implementation of the Perform and Pocemon grant agreements constitutes a breach by the Commission of its contractual obligations, and, secondly, that there is no need to refund part of those sums, or the amount of the liquidate allowance specified by the Commission.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Talanton AE — Symvouleftiki-Ekpaideftiki Etaireia Dianomon, Parochis Ypiresion Marketing kai Dioikisis Epicheiriseon is ordered to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings for interim measures.






(1)  OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2014-12-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2014434EN.01000101.xml










4.12.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 434/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

3 December 2014
(2014/C 434/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2331




JPY


Japanese yen


147,20




DKK


Danish krone


7,4411




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78620




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2713




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2032




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,6560




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,623




HUF


Hungarian forint


306,72




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1598




RON


Romanian leu


4,4268




TRY


Turkish lira


2,7572




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4620




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4034




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,5597




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5884




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6149




KRW


South Korean won


1 373,85




ZAR


South African rand


13,7793




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,5752




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6755




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 167,74




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2505




PHP


Philippine peso


55,018




RUB


Russian rouble


65,3750




THB


Thai baht


40,511




BRL


Brazilian real


3,1534




MXN


Mexican peso


17,3620




INR


Indian rupee


76,2179






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.