do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015011EN.01000201.xml










15.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

14 January 2015
(2015/C 11/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1775




JPY


Japanese yen


137,48




DKK


Danish krone


7,4386




GBP


Pound sterling


0,77530




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5011




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2010




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,0560




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


28,229




HUF


Hungarian forint


319,97




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2863




RON


Romanian leu


4,4928




TRY


Turkish lira


2,6957




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4473




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4089




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1301




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5250




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5724




KRW


South Korean won


1 277,86




ZAR


South African rand


13,5437




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2968




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6845




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 863,25




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2317




PHP


Philippine peso


52,547




RUB


Russian rouble


77,9030




THB


Thai baht


38,603




BRL


Brazilian real


3,0909




MXN


Mexican peso


17,2151




INR


Indian rupee


73,2273






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-1/12: Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2015  — France v Commission (State aid — Aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty — Restructuring aid planned by the French authorities for SeaFrance SA — Capital increase and loans granted by the SNCF to SeaFrance — Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market — Concept of State aid — Criterion of private investor — Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, aid to undertakings, company in difficulties, control of State aid, industrial restructuring, rail transport








C_2015065EN.01002902.xml










23.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/29





Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2015 — France v Commission
(Case T-1/12) (1)

((State aid - Aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty - Restructuring aid planned by the French authorities for SeaFrance SA - Capital increase and loans granted by the SNCF to SeaFrance - Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - Criterion of private investor - Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty))
(2015/C 065/40)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: French Republic (represented by: initially E. Belliard, G. de Bergues and J. Gstalter, then G. de Bergues, D. Colas and J. Bousin, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, B. Stromsky and T. Maxian Rusche, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/397/EU of 24 October 2011 on State aid SA 32600 (2011/C) — France — Restructuring aid to SeaFrance SA granted by the SNCF (OJ 2012, L 195, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 17.3.2012.
Case C-179/13: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep — Netherlands) — Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank v L.F. Evans (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Determination of the social security legislation applicable to a worker — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Applicability — Employment of a national of a Member State at the consulate of a third State in the territory of another Member State in whose territory he resides — Vienna Convention on consular relations — Article 71(2) — National legislation according facilities, privileges and immunities to permanent residents)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consulate, social security, third country, working conditions








C_2015073EN.01000402.xml










2.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/4






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep — Netherlands) — Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank v L.F. Evans
(Case C-179/13) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Determination of the social security legislation applicable to a worker - Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 - Applicability - Employment of a national of a Member State at the consulate of a third State in the territory of another Member State in whose territory he resides - Vienna Convention on consular relations - Article 71(2) - National legislation according facilities, privileges and immunities to permanent residents)
(2015/C 073/05)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank

Defendant: L.F. Evans

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1992/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006, read in conjunction with Article 16 of that regulation, should be construed as meaning that, for the period during which a national of a Member State has been employed at a consular post of a third State within the territory of a Member State of which he is not a national but within whose territory he resides, that national is not subject to the legislation of a Member State within the meaning of this provision if, by virtue of the legislation of his Member State of residence, adopted pursuant to Article 71(2) of the Vienna Convention on consular relations, concluded at Vienna on 24 April 1963, he is not affiliated to the national social security scheme.


(1)  OJ C 189, 29.6.2013.
Case F-30/14: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 15 January 2015  — Speyart v European Commission
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: administrative sanction, family benefit, staff assessment








C_2015081EN.01003002.xml










9.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 81/30





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 15 January 2015 — Speyart v European Commission
(Case F-30/14) (1)

(2015/C 081/39)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 175, 10/6/14, p. 56.
Case C-573/13: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Air Berlin plc & Co. Luftverkehrs KG v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 — Air services — Second sentence of Article 23(1) — Price transparency — Computerised booking system — Air fares — Indication at all times of the final price)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, consumer information, electronic government, transport price








C_2015073EN.01000602.xml










2.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/6






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Air Berlin plc & Co. Luftverkehrs KG v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV
(Case C-573/13) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 - Air services - Second sentence of Article 23(1) - Price transparency - Computerised booking system - Air fares - Indication at all times of the final price)
(2015/C 073/08)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Air Berlin plc & Co. Luftverkehrs KG

Defendant: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV

Operative part of the judgment







1)


The second sentence of Article 23(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of a computerised booking system such as that at issue in the main proceedings, the final price to be paid must be indicated whenever the prices of air services are shown, including when they are shown for the first time.










2)


The second sentence of Article 23(1) of Regulation No 1008/2008 must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of a computerised booking system such as that at issue in the main proceedings, the final price to be paid must be indicated not only for the air service specifically selected by the customer, but also for each air service in respect of which the fare is shown.






(1)  OJ C 71, 8.3.2014.
Special Report No 19/2014 — ‘EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia’
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: Serbia, pre-accession aid








C_2015011EN.01000301.xml










15.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/3





Special Report No 19/2014
‘EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia’
(2015/C 11/03)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 19/2014 ‘EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia’ 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.
Case T-197/13: Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2015  — MEM v OHIM (MONACO) (Community trade mark — International registration designating the European Community — Word mark MONACO — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctive character — Article 151(1) and Article 154(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 — partial refusal of protection)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, public limited company, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015065EN.01003201.xml










23.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/32





Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2015 — MEM v OHIM (MONACO)
(Case T-197/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - International registration designating the European Community - Word mark MONACO - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 151(1) and Article 154(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - partial refusal of protection))
(2015/C 065/44)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Marques de l’État de Monaco (MEM) (Monaco, Monaco) (represented by: S. Arnaud, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 January 2013 (Case R 113/2012-4) concerning the international registration designating the European Community of the word mark MONACO.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Marques de l’État de Monaco (MEM) to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.
Case C-537/13: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas — Lithuania) — Birutė Šiba v Arūnas Devėnas (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 93/13/EEC — Scope — Consumer contracts — Contract for the provision of legal services concluded between a lawyer and a consumer)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, lawyer, provision of services, unfair terms of contract








C_2015073EN.01000601.xml










2.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/6






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas — Lithuania) — Birutė Šiba v Arūnas Devėnas
(Case C-537/13) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Scope - Consumer contracts - Contract for the provision of legal services concluded between a lawyer and a consumer)
(2015/C 073/07)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Birutė Šiba

Defendant: Arūnas Devėnas

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as applying to standard form contracts for legal services, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, concluded by a lawyer with a natural person acting for purposes which are outside his trade, business or profession.


(1)  OJ C 9, 11.1.2014.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/36 of 12 January 2015 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables ( OJ L 7, 13.1.2015 )
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common organisation of markets, fruit vegetable, import (EU), import price, pip fruit








L_2015009EN.01006101.xml










15.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 9/61







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/36 of 12 January 2015 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 7 of 13 January 2015
)


On page 3, in the Annex:
for:

               ‘
               0808 91 00 
               ’,
read:

               ‘
               0709 91 00 
               ’.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7369 — Santander/PSA/JVs)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Spain, economic concentration, financial services, merger control, motor vehicle








C_2015011EN.01000101.xml










15.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7369 — Santander/PSA/JVs)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 11/01)
On 3 December 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7369. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Joined Cases C-587/13 P and C-588/13 P: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 — Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA, Telefónica SA v European Commission (Appeals — Aid scheme provided for under Spanish tax legislation — Corporate tax provision which enables undertakings established in Spanish territory to write off the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of a shareholding in undertakings which are not established in that territory — Decision declaring the State aid scheme incompatible with the internal market)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Spain, State aid, aid recipient, control of State aid, division of property, goodwill, legal person, tax on income








C_2015146EN.01000801.xml










4.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 146/8





Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 January 2015 — Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA, Telefónica SA v European Commission
(Joined Cases C-587/13 P and C-588/13 P) (1)

((Appeals - Aid scheme provided for under Spanish tax legislation - Corporate tax provision which enables undertakings established in Spanish territory to write off the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of a shareholding in undertakings which are not established in that territory - Decision declaring the State aid scheme incompatible with the internal market))
(2015/C 146/11)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellants: Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA, Telefónica SA (represented by: J. Ruiz Calzado and J. Domínguez Pérez, abogados, and M. Núñez Müller, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Urraca Caviedes and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeals are dismissed.










2.


Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA and Telefónica SA shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 15, 18.1.2014.

OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/40 of 13 January 2015 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables ( OJ L 8, 14.1.2015 )
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common organisation of markets, fruit vegetable, import (EU), import price, pip fruit








L_2015009EN.01006102.xml










15.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 9/61







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/40 of 13 January 2015 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 8 of 14 January 2015
)


On page 11, in the Annex:
for:

               ‘
               0808 91 00 
               ’,
read:

               ‘
               0709 91 00 
               ’.
Joined Cases T-539/12 and T-150/13: Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2015  — Ziegler v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Competition — International removal services market in Belgium — Removals of officials and other staff of the EU — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Cover quotes — Scope of liability of an institution — Principle of res judicata — Due diligence — Causal link)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, European official, indemnification, infringement of EU law, servant (EU), transnational corporation








C_2015065EN.01003001.xml










23.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/30





Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2015 — Ziegler v Commission
(Joined Cases T-539/12 and T-150/13) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Competition - International removal services market in Belgium - Removals of officials and other staff of the EU - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Cover quotes - Scope of liability of an institution - Principle of res judicata - Due diligence - Causal link))
(2015/C 065/41)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Ziegler SA (Brussels, Belgium); and Ziegler Relocation SA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, M. Favart and A. Bailleux, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and A. Bouquet, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action seeking compensation for damage allegedly caused by the adoption of Commission Decision C (2008) 926 final of 11 March 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.543 — International Removal Services), and for damage allegedly caused by the continuation of the practice of ‘cover quotes’ after the adoption of Decision C (2008) 926, between 11 March 2008 and 1 January 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders Ziegler SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission in Case T-539/12;










3.


Orders Ziegler Relocation SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission in Case T-150/13.






(1)  OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
Case C-30/14: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Ryanair Ltd v PR Aviation BV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 96/9/EC — Legal protection of databases — Database not protected by copyright or the sui generis right — Contractual limitation on the rights of users of the database)
Date: 2015-01-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: copyright, data protection, database








C_2015073EN.01000801.xml










2.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 73/8






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Ryanair Ltd v PR Aviation BV
(Case C-30/14) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 96/9/EC - Legal protection of databases - Database not protected by copyright or the sui generis right - Contractual limitation on the rights of users of the database)
(2015/C 073/10)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ryanair Ltd

Defendant: PR Aviation BV

Operative part of the judgment

Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases must be interpreted as meaning that it is not applicable to a database which is not protected either by copyright or by the sui generis right under that directive, so that Articles 6(1), 8 and 15 of that directive do not preclude the author of such a database from laying down contractual limitations on its use by third parties, without prejudice to the applicable national law.


(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.