do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (recast)’ (COM(2015) 48 final — 2015/0027 (COD))
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: application of the law, extra-territoriality, free movement of capital, international law, international trade, market protection, territorial jurisdiction, third country








C_2015268EN.01004501.xml










14.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 268/45





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (recast)’
(COM(2015) 48 final — 2015/0027 (COD))
(2015/C 268/08)
On 12 February 2015 and 4 March 2015 respectively, the European Parliament and the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom (recast)

(COM(2015) 48 final — 2015/0027 (COD)).
Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 506th plenary session of 18 and 19 March 2015 (meeting of 18 March), by 165 votes to one with six abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 18 March 2015.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Henri MALOSSE
Case F-27/14: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 18 March 2015 — DK v EEAS (Civil service — EEAS staff — Official — Discipliary proceedings — Removal from post without reduction of entitlement to a pension — Article 25 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations — Pending criminal proceedings — The facts before the appointing authority and the court hearing the criminal proceedings the same)
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: award of contract, disciplinary proceedings, dismissal, forgery of documents, fraud against the EU, money laundering, pension scheme








C_2015146EN.01004501.xml










4.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 146/45





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 18 March 2015 — DK v EEAS
(Case F-27/14) (1)

((Civil service - EEAS staff - Official - Discipliary proceedings - Removal from post without reduction of entitlement to a pension - Article 25 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations - Pending criminal proceedings - The facts before the appointing authority and the court hearing the criminal proceedings the same))
(2015/C 146/60)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: DK (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt and M. Silva, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision by which the applicant was removed from his post without reduction of his entitlement to a pension, with effect from 1 February 2014, following disciplinary proceedings taken after the indictment of the applicant by the national authorities for European public procurement fraud, forgery and use of forgery, money laundering and corruption.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Annuls the decision of 16 January 2014 by which the European External Action Service removed DK from his post without reduction of his entitlement to a pension;










2.


Orders the European External Action Service to bear its own costs and to pay all the costs incurred by DK.






(1)  OJ C 184, 16.6.2014, p. 43.
Case F-44/15: Action brought on 18 March 2015 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: appointment of staff, competition (EU), executive, indemnification, job access








C_2015221EN.01002701.xml










6.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/27





Action brought on 18 March 2015 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-44/15)
(2015/C 221/36)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: G. Bellotti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision to appoint a person other than the applicant as head of the unit C4 (‘Legal Advice’), the applicant having acted as head of that unit since the departure of the previous head of unit and having submitted an application in response to the vacancy notice for that post.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:






—


annul the decision, under the reference Ares (2015)43686, of 7 January 2015, dismissing the complaint brought on 30 September 2014 (No R/994/14) under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations;










—


annul the decision of 30 June 2014 adopted by the Director General of OLAF, acting as the appointing authority, in relation to the appointment of the head of the unit OLAF.C4 (Legal Advice);










—


declare that, by virtue of the annulment of the two abovementioned decisions, the procedure for the selection of the head of the unit OLAF.C4 (Legal Advice) is vitiated by illegality as of the time when the illegal act was found to have been committed;










—


order the European Commission to pay compensation — to be assessed on equitable principles — in respect of the harm suffered by the applicant connected with the loss of an opportunity, of at least EUR 10  000;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case F-24/14: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 18 March 2015 — Rajala v OHIM (Civil service — Officials — Reports procedure — Appraisal report — General assessment of performance — Consistency)
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: damages, indemnification, staff assessment








C_2015146EN.01004401.xml










4.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 146/44





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 18 March 2015 — Rajala v OHIM
(Case F-24/14) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Reports procedure - Appraisal report - General assessment of performance - Consistency))
(2015/C 146/59)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Tuula Rajala (El Campello, Spain) (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application for annulment of the applicant’s appraisal report in respect of the period from 1 October 2011 to 31 December 2012.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Declares that Ms Rajala is to bear half of her own costs;










3.


Declares that the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay half of the costs incurred by Ms Rajala.






(1)  OJ C 175, 10.6.2014, p. 55.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7528 — Cheung Kong Holdings/Eversholt) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control








C_2015091EN.01000401.xml










18.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7528 — Cheung Kong Holdings/Eversholt)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 91/04)






1.


On 9 March 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 Cheung Kong (Holdings) Limited (CKH) (Hong Kong) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Eversholt Investment Group (Luxembourg) S.à.r.l. and all its subsidiaries (Eversholt) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   CKH: investment holding, property development and investment, hotels and serviced suites operation, property and project management, investment in infrastructure businesses and securities and ownership and leasing of aircraft; and, through its interests in the following companies, the following activities:






i.


Hutchison Whampoa Limited: ports and related services, property and hotels, retail, infrastructure, energy and telecommunications;










ii.


Cheung Kong Infrastructure Holdings Limited: investment in energy infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, water infrastructure and infrastructure related businesses operating in Hong Kong, mainland China, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand and Canada,




—   Eversholt: supply of railway rolling stock and associated equipment under operating leases, as well as associated maintenance services, to TOCs and FOCs operating in Great Britain.










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.7528 — Cheung Kong Holdings/Eversholt, 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.
Case C-75/14: Order of the President of the Court of 18 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 3 de Ávila — Spain) — Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, SA v Francisco Javier Rodríguez Barbero, María Ángeles Barbero Gutiérrez
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, interest, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2015213EN.01002003.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/20





Order of the President of the Court of 18 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 3 de Ávila — Spain) — Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, SA v Francisco Javier Rodríguez Barbero, María Ángeles Barbero Gutiérrez
(Case C-75/14) (1)

(2015/C 213/32)
Language of the case: Spain
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7547 — Varo/GEKOL) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, merger control, petroleum product








C_2015091EN.01000301.xml










18.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/3





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7547 — Varo/GEKOL)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 91/03)






1.


On 9 March 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 Varo Energy Germany GmbH (‘Varo Germany’, Germany) ultimately jointly controlled by Vitol Holding BV (Netherlands) and — indirectly — by funds managed by The Carlyle Group (United States), through CIEP II S.à.r.l., acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Kommanditgesellschaft GEKOL Mineralölhandel G.m.b.H. & Co. Hamburg, Germany (‘GEKOL’, Germany) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Varo Germany is active in the refining of crude oil; storage and distribution of refined oil products,










—


GEKOL is active in the distribution of refined oil products such as gasoil (light heating oil), diesel, petrol (gasoline) and jet fuel.














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.7547 — Varo/GEKOL, 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.
Summary of Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carcinogenic substance, chemical compound, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, toxic substance








C_2015091EN.01000201.xml










18.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/2





Summary of Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)
(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 91/02)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2015) 1619


17 March 2015


Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP)
EC No 204-211-0
CAS No 117-81-7
Dibutyl phthalate (DBP)
EC No 201-557-4
CAS No 84-74-2


Roxel (UK Rocket Motors) Ltd, Summerfield, Kidderminster, DY11 7RZ, Worcestershire, UNITED KINGDOM


REACH/14/3/0
REACH/14/3/1
REACH/14/3/2


The industrial use of DEHP in the manufacture of solid propellants and motor charges for rockets and tactical missiles
The industrial use of DBP in the manufacture of solid propellants and motor charges for rockets and tactical missiles
The industrial use of DBP within a specialty paint in the manufacture of motors for rockets and tactical missiles


21 February 2019








—


Risk is adequately controlled in accordance with Article 60(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.










—


There are no suitable alternatives at present and search for technically feasible alternatives is ongoing under a replacement programme with requalification requirements for defence industry products.










(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/chemicals/reach/authorisation/index_en.htm
Case T-125/15: Action brought on 18 March 2015 — Unicorn v OHIM — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, information system, motor fuel, motor vehicle, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015171EN.01003101.xml










26.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/31





Action brought on 18 March 2015 — Unicorn v OHIM — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)
(Case T-125/15)
(2015/C 171/36)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Unicorn a.s. (Praha, Czech Republic) (represented by: L. Lorenc, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Mercilink Equipment Leasing Ltd (Limassol, Cyprus)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘UNICORN’ — Community trade mark No 11 014 701

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 January 2015 in Case R 150/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the contested decision;










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


OHIM did not properly take into consideration evidence submitted by the applicant;










—


OHIM incorrectly considered good reputation of the earlier trademarks.
Case C-133/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) lodged on 18 March 2015 — H.C. Chavez-Vilchez and Others, other parties: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank (Svb) and Others
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, child care, interpretation of the law, national, residence, rights of aliens, third country








C_2015178EN.01000902.xml










1.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 178/9





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) lodged on 18 March 2015 — H.C. Chavez-Vilchez and Others, other parties: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank (Svb) and Others
(Case C-133/15)
(2015/C 178/10)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: H.C. Chavez-Vilchez, P. Pinas, U. Nikolic, X.V. Garcia Perez, J. Uwituze, Y.R.L. Wip, I.O. Enowassam, A.E. Guerrero Chavez,

Other parties: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank (Svb), College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente Arnhem, College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente’s-Gravenhage, College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente’s-Hertogenbosch, College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente Amsterdam, College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente Rijswijk, College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente Rotterdam.

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 20 of the TFEU be interpreted as precluding a Member State from depriving a third-country national who is responsible for the day to day and primary care of his/her minor child, who is a national of that Member State, of the right of residence in that Member State?










2.


In answering that question, is it relevant that the legal, financial and/or emotional burden does not rest entirely with that parent and, furthermore, that it cannot be excluded that the other parent, who is a national of the Member State, might in fact be able to care for the child? In that case, should the parent/third-country national have to make a plausible case that the other parent is not able to assume responsibility for the care of the child, so that the child would be obliged to leave the territory of the European Union if the parent/third-country national is denied a right of residence?
Corrigendum to new national side of euro coins intended for circulation ( OJ C 84, 12.3.2015 )
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: San Marino, commemoration, euro, issuing of currency








C_2015091EN.01000501.xml










18.3.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 91/5





Corrigendum to new national side of euro coins intended for circulation
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 84 of 12 March 2015
)
(2015/C 91/05)
On page 3:

for:


‘Date of issue: September 2015’,


read:


‘Date of issue: September 2014’.
Case T-126/15: Action brought on 18 March 2015 — El Corte Inglés v OHIM — Grup Supeco Maxor (Supeco)
Date: 2015-03-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Spain, chain store, registered trade mark, supermarket, trade-mark law








C_2015155EN.01003401.xml










11.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 155/34





Action brought on 18 March 2015 — El Corte Inglés v OHIM — Grup Supeco Maxor (Supeco)
(Case T-126/15)
(2015/C 155/40)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Grup Supeco Maxor, SL (Madrid, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


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

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘Supeco’ — Application for registration No 10 884 741

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2014 in Case R 1112/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of 4 December 2014 of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM in Case R 1112/2014-5 in so far as in upholding in part the appeal brought by the applicant for the trade mark at issue, it overturned the Opposition Division’s decision upholding in part Opposition B 2 0 54  040 and refusing in part Community trade mark No 10 884 741 ‘Supeco’ (figurative); and










—


order the party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.