do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-279/14: Order of the General Court of 14 April 2015 — Sabic Polyolefine v Commission
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Germany, control of State aid, electricity supply, energy consumption, infringement of EU law, renewable energy, terms for aid








C_2015190EN.01003101.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/31






Order of the General Court of 14 April 2015 — Sabic Polyolefine v Commission
(Case T-279/14) (1)

(2015/C 190/35)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  
            OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/592 of 14 April 2015 approving a non-minor amendment to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Presunto de Barrancos/Paleta de Barrancos (PDO))
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Alentejo, Portugal, designation of origin, labelling, meat product, pigmeat, product designation








L_2015099EN.01000401.xml










16.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 99/4








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/592
of 14 April 2015
         
approving a non-minor amendment to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Presunto de Barrancos/Paleta de Barrancos (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Portugal's application for the approval of an amendment to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Presunto de Barrancos’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 (2).












(2)


Since the amendment in question is not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation (3).












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendment to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendment to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Presunto de Barrancos’/‘Paleta de Barrancos’ (PDO) is hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 April 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






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

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 of 17 December 1996 on the entry of certain names in the ‘Register of protected designation of origin and protected geographical indications’ provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 327, 18.12.1996, p. 11).

(3)  
            OJ C 432, 2.12.2014, p. 16.
Case C-76/14: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Braşov (Romania)) — Mihai Manea v Instituția Prefectului județul Brașov — Serviciul Public Comunitar Regim de Permise de Conducere și Înmatriculare a Vehiculelor (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Internal taxation — Article 110 TFEU — Tax levied by a Member State on motor vehicles at the time of their first registration or of the first transfer of the right of ownership — Neutrality as between second-hand motor vehicles imported from other Member States and similar motor vehicles available on the domestic market)
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: environmental tax, motor car, transfer of property, vehicle registration, vehicle tax








C_2015198EN.01001201.xml










15.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/12





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Braşov (Romania)) — Mihai Manea v Instituția Prefectului județul Brașov — Serviciul Public Comunitar Regim de Permise de Conducere și Înmatriculare a Vehiculelor
(Case C-76/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Internal taxation - Article 110 TFEU - Tax levied by a Member State on motor vehicles at the time of their first registration or of the first transfer of the right of ownership - Neutrality as between second-hand motor vehicles imported from other Member States and similar motor vehicles available on the domestic market))
(2015/C 198/15)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Braşov

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Mihai Manea

Defendant: Instituția Prefectului județul Brașov — Serviciul Public Comunitar Regim de Permise de Conducere și Înmatriculare a Vehiculelor

Operative part of the judgment

Article 110 TFEU must be interpreted as:






—


not precluding a Member State from introducing a tax on motor vehicles which is levied on imported second-hand vehicles at the time of their first registration in that Member State and on vehicles already registered in that Member State at the time of the first transfer, within that Member State, of the ownership of those vehicles;










—


precluding that Member State from exempting from that tax vehicles already registered and in respect of which a tax previously in force but found to be incompatible with EU law has been paid.






(1)  OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
Case C-217/14: Order of the President of the Court of 14 April 2015 — European Commission v Ireland, intervenors: Kingdom of the Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: domestic market, electrical industry, infringement of EU law, national implementing measure, periodic penalty payment








C_2015213EN.01002103.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/21





Order of the President of the Court of 14 April 2015 — European Commission v Ireland, intervenors: Kingdom of the Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Case C-217/14) (1)

(2015/C 213/36)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
Case C-536/14: Order of the President of the Court of 14 April 2015 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: information network, market research, regulation of telecommunications, systems interconnection, transmission network








C_2015213EN.01002203.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/22





Order of the President of the Court of 14 April 2015 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
(Case C-536/14) (1)

(2015/C 213/40)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 34, 2.2.2015.
Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, air transport, inland transport, invitation to tender, public service, transport regulations








C_2015119EN.01000401.xml










14.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/4





Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 119/04)






Member State


France




Route concerned


La Rochelle (Ile de Ré) – Poitiers (Biard) – Lyon (Saint Exupéry)




Period of validity of the contract


from 1 November 2015 to 31 October 2019




Deadline for submission of applications and tenders


29 June 2015 by 17.00 Paris time




Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained







Syndicat Mixte de l’Aéroport Poitiers Biard




Béatrice Moussion, Directrice




Hôtel du Département




Place Aristide Briand




BP 319




86008 Poitiers Cedex




Tel. +33 549556640




Fax +33 549882297




E-mail: bmoussion@cg86.fr




or





Chambre de Commerce et d’Industrie de la Rochelle




Thomas Juin, Directeur de l’Aéroport




Aéroport de la Rochelle




Rue du Jura




17000 La Rochelle




Tel. +33 546428671




E-mail: tjuin@larochelle.aeroport.fr
Case T-186/15: Action brought on 14 April 2015 — CSTP Azienda della Mobilità v Commission
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, State aid, carriage of passengers, services of general interest








C_2015190EN.01002901.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/29






Action brought on 14 April 2015 — CSTP Azienda della Mobilità v Commission
(Case T-186/15)
(2015/C 190/32)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: CSTP Azienda della Mobilità SpA (Salerno, Italy) (represented by: G. Capo and L. Visone, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the European Commission of 19 January 2015 on State aid SA.35842 (2014/C) (ex 2012/NN), notified to the applicant on 19 February 2015, implemented by Italy;










—


declare, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU and Article 264 TFEU, that the Commission’s decision of 19 January 2015 in the proceedings relating to State aid SA.35842 (2014/C) (ex 2012/NN) (for EUR 4 9 51  838) is entirely null and void in so far as it states that the sums awarded by way of compensation for public service obligations within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69, granted under Article 11 of that regulation in respect of tariff obligations in the Local Public Transport sector, could be deemed a non-notified measure constituting State aid under Article 107(1) TFEU which is incompatible with the internal market;










—


declare, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU and Article 264 TFEU, that the Commission’s decision of 19 January 2015 in the proceedings relating to State aid SA.35842 is entirely null and void in so far as it lays down operational measures for the recovery of aid paid by the Italian State;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those relied on in Case T-185/15 Buonotourist v Commission.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/624 of 14 April 2015 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Patata Rossa di Colfiorito (PGI))
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, designation of origin, labelling, potato, product designation








L_2015103EN.01000401.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 103/4








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/624
of 14 April 2015
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Patata Rossa di Colfiorito (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Italy's application to register the name ‘Patata Rossa di Colfiorito’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Patata Rossa di Colfiorito’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



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


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 April 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






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

(2)  
            OJ C 432, 2.12.2014, p. 8.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case C-170/15 P: Appeal brought on 14 April 2015 by Enercon GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 January 2015 in Case T-655/13, Enercon GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, energy industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wind energy








C_2016136EN.01000602.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/6





Appeal brought on 14 April 2015 by Enercon GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 January 2015 in Case T-655/13, Enercon GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-170/15 P)
(2016/C 136/10)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Enercon GmbH (represented by: R. Böhm, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
By order of 21 January 2016 the Court of Justice of the European Union (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015119EN.01000201.xml










14.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

13 April 2015
(2015/C 119/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0552




JPY


Japanese yen


127,20




DKK


Danish krone


7,4715




GBP


Pound sterling


0,72150




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3309




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0373




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,5480




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,392




HUF


Hungarian forint


296,85




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0136




RON


Romanian leu


4,4156




TRY


Turkish lira


2,7985




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3925




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3324




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,1779




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,4187




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4491




KRW


South Korean won


1 163,30




ZAR


South African rand


12,8258




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,5552




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5680




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


13 723,03




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9172




PHP


Philippine peso


47,200




RUB


Russian rouble


55,2605




THB


Thai baht


34,376




BRL


Brazilian real


3,2694




MXN


Mexican peso


16,1398




INR


Indian rupee


65,8671






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-168/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov (Slovakia) lodged on 14 April 2015 — Milena Tomášová v Slovenská republika — Ministerstvo spravodlivosti SR, Pohotovosť, s.r.o.
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, damages, enforcement of ruling, infringement of EU law, liability of the State, unfair terms of contract








C_2015245EN.01000302.xml










27.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/3





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov (Slovakia) lodged on 14 April 2015 — Milena Tomášová v Slovenská republika — Ministerstvo spravodlivosti SR, Pohotovosť, s.r.o.
(Case C-168/15)
(2015/C 245/04)
Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Okresný súd Prešov

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Milena Tomášová

Defendants: Slovenská republika — Ministerstvo spravodlivosti SR,
Pohotovosť, s.r.o.

Intervener in support of the applicant: Združenie na ochranu spotrebiteľa HOOS

Questions referred







1.


Is there a serious breach of EU law if, in an enforcement procedure carried out on the basis of an arbitration award, performance of an unfair term is enforced, contrary to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union?










2.


May liability of a Member State for a breach of Community law arise before a party to proceedings has used all legal remedies available in the legal order of the Member State in proceedings for enforcement of an award? In the light of the facts of the case, may that liability of a Member State arise in the present case before the actual conclusion of the proceedings for enforcement of the award and before exhaustion of the applicant’s possibility of requiring an account for unjust enrichment?










3.


If so, is the conduct of an authority as described by the applicant, in the light of the particular facts and in particular of the absolute inactivity of the applicant and the non-exhaustion of all legal remedies made available by the law of the Member State, a sufficiently clear and serious breach of Community law?










4.


If there is a sufficiently serious breach of Community law in the present case, does the sum claimed by the applicant represent damage for which the Member State is liable? Is it possible for the damage as so understood to be equated with the debt collected which constitutes unjust enrichment?










5.


Does accounting for unjust enrichment, as a legal remedy, have priority over compensation for damage?
Case T-184/15: Action brought on 14 April 2015 — Trivisio Prototyping v Commission
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Russia, abuse of power, debt, enforcement of ruling, engineer, financial aid, subcontracting








C_2015262EN.01003001.xml










10.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/30





Action brought on 14 April 2015 — Trivisio Prototyping v Commission
(Case T-184/15)
(2015/C 262/40)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Trivisio Prototyping GmbH (Trier, Germany) (represented by: A. Bartosch and A. Böhlke, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Decision C(2015) 633 final of 2 February 2015 concerning recovery of the sum of EUR 3 85  112 ,19 together with interest owed by Trivisio Prototyping GmbH;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





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 an error of assessment of the facts






—


The applicant claims, inter alia, that the Commission was aware, or should in any event have been aware, of the involvement of Russian engineers at the time of signing the ULTRA (‘Ultra portable augmented reality for industrial maintenance applications’), IMPROVE (‘Improving Display and Rendering Technology for Virtual Environments’) and CINeSPACE (‘Experiencing urban film and cultural heritage while on-the-move’) grant agreements. It adds that recovery of the sum claimed in those circumstances is an abuse of power.














2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the applicant did not infringe the rules of Annex 2 to the grant agreement relating to subcontracting






—


The applicant claims that there existed a relationship of control between it and the employer of the Russian engineers — irrespective of fact that they consist of independent legal persons — with the result that there is no infringement of the provisions of Annex II to the grant agreement.














3.


Third plea in law, alleging in the alternative an infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations






—


In the alternative, the applicant relies on the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations against the recovery of the contested sum.
Initiation of proceedings (Case M.7419 — TeliaSonera/Telenor/JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-04-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, telecommunications industry








C_2015119EN.01000101.xml










14.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/1





Initiation of proceedings
(Case M.7419 — TeliaSonera/Telenor/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 119/01)
On 8 April 2015, the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the above-mentioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration, and is without prejudice to the final decision on the case. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.
In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301) or by post, under reference number M.7419 — TeliaSonera/Telenor/JV, 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’).