do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-419/13: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Copyright and related rights — Directive 2001/29/EC — Article 4 — Distribution right — Exhaustion rule — Concept of ‘object’ — Transfer of the image of a protected work from a paper poster to a painter’s canvas — Replacement of the medium — Impact on exhaustion)
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: copyright, literary and artistic property, work of art








C_2015107EN.01000601.xml










30.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/6






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright
(Case C-419/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 4 - Distribution right - Exhaustion rule - Concept of ‘object’ - Transfer of the image of a protected work from a paper poster to a painter’s canvas - Replacement of the medium - Impact on exhaustion))
(2015/C 107/07)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Art & Allposters International BV

Defendant: Stichting Pictoright

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the rule of exhaustion of the distribution right set out in Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29 does not apply in a situation where a reproduction of a protected work, after having been marketed in the European Union with the copyright holder’s consent, has undergone an alteration of its medium, such as the transfer of that reproduction from a paper poster onto a canvas, and is placed on the market again in its new form.


(1)  OJ C 325, 9.11.2013.
Case C-441/13: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien — Austria) — Pez Hejduk v EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 5(3) — Special jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict — Copyright — Dematerialised content — Placing online — Determination of the place of the event giving rise to the damage — Criteria)
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet, access to information, conflict of jurisdiction, copyright, offence








C_2015107EN.01000701.xml










30.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/7






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien — Austria) — Pez Hejduk v EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH
(Case C-441/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 5(3) - Special jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict - Copyright - Dematerialised content - Placing online - Determination of the place of the event giving rise to the damage - Criteria))
(2015/C 107/08)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Handelsgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Pez Hejduk

Defendant: EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of an allegation of infringement of copyright and rights related to copyright guaranteed by the Member State of the court seised, that court has jurisdiction, on the basis of the place where the damage occurred, to hear an action for damages in respect of an infringement of those rights resulting from the placing of protected photographs online on a website accessible in its territorial jurisdiction. That court has jurisdiction only to rule on the damage caused in the Member State within which the court is situated.


(1)  OJ C 313, 26.10.2013.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7481 — Brookfield / TDF) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: State aid, broadcasting, control of State aid, investment company, telecommunications industry








C_2015020EN.01000901.xml










22.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 20/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7481 — Brookfield / TDF)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 20/07)






1.


On 14 January 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Brookfield Infrastructure Fund GP II LLC (‘Brookfield’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the undertaking TDF SAS (‘TDF’, France), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   Brookfield: asset management with investments in infrastructure,
—   TDF: terrestrial broadcasting and telecommunications services.










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. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in this Notice.










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.7481 — Brookfield / TDF, 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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Addendum to the call for proposals under the annual work programme for grants in the field of the trans-European transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020 ( OJ C 308, 11.9.2014 )
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, economic support, invitation to tender, trans-European network, transport infrastructure








C_2015020EN.01000801.xml










22.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 20/8





Addendum to the call for proposals under the annual work programme for grants in the field of the trans-European transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020
(Official Journal of the European Union C 308 of 11 September 2014)
(2015/C 20/05)
The European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport is announcing an addendum to the call for proposals under the annual work programme 2014 for grants in the field of the trans-European transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020, as published in the Official Journal (2014/C 308/06).
The addendum to the call for proposals is available on:
http://inea.ec.europa.eu/en/cef/cef_transport/apply_for_funding/cef_transport_call_for_proposals_2014.htm
Case C-463/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli di Stato (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Betting and gambling — National rules — Reorganisation of the licensing system through the alignment of licence expiry dates — New call for tenders — Licences with a period of validity shorter than that of previous licences — Restriction — Overriding reasons in the public interest — Proportionality)
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, game of chance, invitation to tender, provision of services, right of establishment








C_2015107EN.01000801.xml










30.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/8






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli di Stato
(Case C-463/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Betting and gambling - National rules - Reorganisation of the licensing system through the alignment of licence expiry dates - New call for tenders - Licences with a period of validity shorter than that of previous licences - Restriction - Overriding reasons in the public interest - Proportionality))
(2015/C 107/09)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd

Defendants: Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli di Stato

Intervening parties: Intralot Italia SpA, SNAI SpA, Galassia Game Srl, Eurobet Italia Srl unipersonale, Lottomatica Scommesse Srl, Sisal Match Point SpA, Cogetech Gaming Srl

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU and the principles of equal treatment and effectiveness must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings which provides for the organisation of a fresh call for tenders for the award of licences with a period of validity shorter than that of licences awarded previously because of the reorganisation of the system by way of an alignment of licence expiry dates.


(1)  OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.
Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1361/2014 of 18 December 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 1126/2008 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards International Financial Reporting Standards 3 and 13 and International Accounting Standard 40 ( OJ L 365, 19.12.2014 )
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: accounting, exchange of information, financial instrument, financial legislation, international standard, investment, property market




L_2015015EN.01010602.xml










22.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 15/106







Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1361/2014 of 18 December 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 1126/2008 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards International Financial Reporting Standards 3 and 13 and International Accounting Standard 40

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 365 of 19 December 2014
)


On page 121, Article 2:
for:


‘Article 2
Each company shall apply the amendments referred to in Article 1(1), at the latest, as from the commencement date of its first financial year starting on or after [set the first day of the month following the date of entry into force of this Regulation].’

,read:


‘Article 2
Each company shall apply the amendments referred to in Article 1(1), at the latest, as from the commencement date of its first financial year starting on or after 1 January 2015.’
Addendum to the calls for proposals under the multiannual work programme for grants in the field of the trans-European transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020 ( OJ C 308, 11.9.2014 )
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, economic support, invitation to tender, trans-European network, transport infrastructure








C_2015020EN.01000802.xml










22.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 20/8





Addendum to the calls for proposals under the multiannual work programme for grants in the field of the trans-European transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020
(Official Journal of the European Union C 308 of 11 September 2014)
(2015/C 20/06)
The European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport is announcing an addendum to the calls for proposals under the multiannual work programme 2014 for grants in the field of the trans-European transport infrastructure under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020, as published in the Official Journal (2014/C 308/07).
The addendum to the calls for proposals is available on:
http://inea.ec.europa.eu/en/cef/cef_transport/apply_for_funding/cef_transport_call_for_proposals_2014.htm
Joined Cases F-1/14 and F-48/14: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015  — Kakol v Commission (Civil Service — Competition — Open competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Conditions for eligibility — Not admitted to the competition — Failure to state reasons — Admitted to an earlier similar competition — Specific duty to state reasons — Action for annulment — Action for compensation)
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EPSO, European official, competition (EU), recognition of vocational training qualifications








C_2015089EN.01004501.xml










16.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 89/45





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015 — Kakol v Commission
(Joined Cases F-1/14 and F-48/14) (1)

((Civil Service - Competition - Open competition EPSO/AD/177/10 - Conditions for eligibility - Not admitted to the competition - Failure to state reasons - Admitted to an earlier similar competition - Specific duty to state reasons - Action for annulment - Action for compensation))
(2015/C 089/54)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Danuta Kakol (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented initially by: F. Frabetti, lawyer, and subsequently by: R. Duta, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Re:


F-1/14: Application for annulment of the decision of EPSO not to admit the applicant to the assessment stage because of her level of education which does not correspond to completed university studies of at least three years attested to by a diploma relevant to the post, or equivalent training/an equivalent professional qualification relevant to the post.

F-48/14: Application for annulment, firstly, of the decision of 14 February 2014 by which the selection board in selection procedure EU Careers EPSO/AD/177/10-AUDIT2013-Administrators-AD 5 confirmed, after re-examination, the initial decision of the selection board of 3 October 2013 not to admit the applicant to the assessment centre stage of the competition because her level of education did not correspond to a full cycle of university studies equivalent to at least three years, as evidenced by a diploma related to the nature of the duties, or professional training/qualification related to the nature of the duties and of an equivalent level and, secondly, insofar as necessary, of the initial decision of the selection board of 3 October 2013.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Removes Case F-1/14 from the Register of the Tribunal;










2.


Annuls the decision of 14 February 2014 of the selection board in competition EPSO/AD/177/10 not to admit Ms Kakol to that competition;










3.


Dismisses the remainder of the action in Case F-48/14;










4.


Orders the European Commission, in Case F-1/14, to pay the costs incurred by Ms Kakol and to bear its own costs;










5.


Orders the European Commission, in Case F-48/14, to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Ms Kakol.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014, p. 54, and OJ C 235, 21.7.2015, p. 35.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7468 — OJI Holdings/Itochu Corporation/Sales and Production JVS)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Japan, economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, merger control, pulp and paper industry, retail selling








C_2015020EN.01000102.xml










22.1.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 20/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7468 — OJI Holdings/Itochu Corporation/Sales and Production JVS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 20/02)
On 16 January 2015, 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 32015M7468. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-55/14: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons — Belgium) — Régie communale autonome du stade Luc Varenne v État belge (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 77/388/EEC — VAT — Exemptions — Article 13B(b) — Concept of ‘exempted letting of immovable property’ — Provision, for consideration, of a football stadium — Contract for provision reserving certain rights and prerogatives to the owner — Supply, by the owner, of various services representing 80 % of the charge specified in the contract)
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, property leasing, sports facilities, tax exemption








C_2015107EN.01001301.xml










30.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/13






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons — Belgium) — Régie communale autonome du stade Luc Varenne v État belge
(Case C-55/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 77/388/EEC - VAT - Exemptions - Article 13B(b) - Concept of ‘exempted letting of immovable property’ - Provision, for consideration, of a football stadium - Contract for provision reserving certain rights and prerogatives to the owner - Supply, by the owner, of various services representing 80 % of the charge specified in the contract))
(2015/C 107/16)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Régie communale autonome du stade Luc Varenne

Defendant: État belge

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, must be interpreted as meaning that the act of making available, for consideration, a football stadium under a contract reserving certain rights and prerogatives to the stadium owner and providing for the supply, by the owner, of various services, including services of maintenance, cleaning, repair and upgrading, representing 80 % of the charge which is agreed in the contact to be payable, does not constitute, as a general rule, a ‘letting of immovable property’ within the meaning of that provision. The finding of the facts is for the referring court.


(1)  OJ C 102, 7.4.2014.
Case T-172/13: Judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2015  — Novomatic v OHIM — Simba Toys (AFRICAN SIMBA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark AFRICAN SIMBA — Earlier national figurative mark Simba — Relative ground for refusal — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-01-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2015081EN.01001701.xml










9.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 81/17





Judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2015 — Novomatic v OHIM — Simba Toys (AFRICAN SIMBA)
(Case T-172/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark AFRICAN SIMBA - Earlier national figurative mark Simba - Relative ground for refusal - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2015/C 081/21)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Novomatic AG (Gumpoldskirchen, Austria) (represented by: W. Mosing, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG (Fürth, Germany) (represented by: O. Ruhl and C. Sachs, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 January 2013 (Case R 157/2012-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG and Novomatic AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Novomatic AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 141, 18.5.2013.