do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Corrigendum to the notice of open competitions — Administrators (AD 5/AD 7) specialising in legal research — EPSO/AD/295/15 — Lawyers with Bulgarian legal training (BG) — EPSO/AD/296/15 — Lawyers with German legal training (DE) — EPSO/AD/297/15 — Lawyers with Croatian legal training (HR) — EPSO/AD/298/15 — Lawyers with Irish legal training (IE) — EPSO/AD/299/15 — Lawyers with Lithuanian legal training (LT) — EPSO/AD/300/15 — Lawyers with Slovak legal training (SK) — (OJ C 68 A, 26.2.2015)
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, Croatia, EPSO, Germany, Ireland, Lithuania, Slovakia, administrator, competition (EU), legal profession








CA2015122EN.01000101.xml










16.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 122/1





Corrigendum to the notice of open competitions — Administrators (AD 5/AD 7) specialising in legal research — EPSO/AD/295/15 — Lawyers with Bulgarian legal training (BG) — EPSO/AD/296/15 — Lawyers with German legal training (DE) — EPSO/AD/297/15 — Lawyers with Croatian legal training (HR) — EPSO/AD/298/15 — Lawyers with Irish legal training (IE) — EPSO/AD/299/15 — Lawyers with Lithuanian legal training (LT) — EPSO/AD/300/15 — Lawyers with Slovak legal training (SK)
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 68 A of 26 February 2015
)
(2015/C 122 A/01)

On page 2, Section I, point 3:


for:

‘Deadline (including validation): 31 March 2015 at 12.00 (midday), Brussels time.’,

read:

‘Deadline (including validation): 9 April 2015 at 12.00 (midday), Brussels time.’.
Case T-576/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 April 2015 — Schenker Customs Agency v Commission (Customs Union — Post-clearance recovery of import duties — Importation of glyphosate originating from Taiwan — Application for remission of import duties submitted by a customs agent — Article 239 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 — Fairness clause — Special situation — Declarations for release for free circulation — Certificates of incorrect origin — Concept of obvious negligence — Commission decision declaring remission of duties not justified)
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Taiwan, certificate of origin, exemption from customs duties, free circulation, herbicide, import (EU), right to justice








C_2015190EN.01000901.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/9






Judgment of the General Court of 16 April 2015 — Schenker Customs Agency v Commission
(Case T-576/11) (1)

((Customs Union - Post-clearance recovery of import duties - Importation of glyphosate originating from Taiwan - Application for remission of import duties submitted by a customs agent - Article 239 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Fairness clause - Special situation - Declarations for release for free circulation - Certificates of incorrect origin - Concept of obvious negligence - Commission decision declaring remission of duties not justified))
(2015/C 190/10)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Schenker Customs Agency BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Biermasz and A. Jansen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by L. Keppenne and F. Wilman and subsequently by A. Caeiros and B.-R. Killmann, Agents, and by Y. Van Gerven, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C (2011) 5208 final of 27 July 2011, finding that the remission of import duties is not justified in a particular case (Case REM 01/2010).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Schenker Customs Agency BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  
            OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
Case T-190/15: Action brought on 16 April 2015 — Intervog/OHIM (meet me)
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Internet site, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015198EN.01004202.xml










15.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/42





Action brought on 16 April 2015 — Intervog/OHIM (meet me)
(Case T-190/15)
(2015/C 198/58)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Intervog (Paris, France) (represented by: M.-R. Hirsch, lawyer)

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

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Trade mark at issue: Figurative Community mark containing the word elements ‘meet me’ — Application for registration No 12 010 781

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 February 2015 in Case R 845/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (failure to state reasons);










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (error of assessment in the analysis of the mark’s distinctive character);










—


Infringement of the principle of equality.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015122EN.01000301.xml










16.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 122/3





Euro exchange rates (1)

15 April 2015
(2015/C 122/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0579




JPY


Japanese yen


126,52




DKK


Danish krone


7,4671




GBP


Pound sterling


0,71680




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3115




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0321




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,4150




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,415




HUF


Hungarian forint


297,85




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0178




RON


Romanian leu


4,4197




TRY


Turkish lira


2,8711




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3945




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3277




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2004




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,4104




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4402




KRW


South Korean won


1 159,50




ZAR


South African rand


12,8567




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,5644




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5798




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


13 686,90




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9206




PHP


Philippine peso


47,086




RUB


Russian rouble


53,6110




THB


Thai baht


34,327




BRL


Brazilian real


3,2661




MXN


Mexican peso


16,2123




INR


Indian rupee


65,9826






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Joined Cases C-271/14 and C-273/14: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France)) — LFB Biomédicaments SA, Association des déficitaires en Alpha 1 Antitrypsine (Association ADAAT Alpha 1-France) (C-271/14), Pierre Fabre Médicament SA (C-273/14) v Ministre des Finances et des Comptes publics, Ministre des Affaires sociales et de la Santé (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Medicinal products for human use — Directive 89/105/EEC — Article 6(3) and (5) — Removal of medicinal products from a list of pharmaceutical proprietary products covered in addition to fixed payments in respect of hospital treatment — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: health care system, health costs, medicinal product








C_2015198EN.01001401.xml










15.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/14





Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France)) — LFB Biomédicaments SA, Association des déficitaires en Alpha 1 Antitrypsine (Association ADAAT Alpha 1-France) (C-271/14), Pierre Fabre Médicament SA (C-273/14) v Ministre des Finances et des Comptes publics, Ministre des Affaires sociales et de la Santé
(Joined Cases C-271/14 and C-273/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Medicinal products for human use - Directive 89/105/EEC - Article 6(3) and (5) - Removal of medicinal products from a list of pharmaceutical proprietary products covered in addition to fixed payments in respect of hospital treatment - Obligation to state reasons))
(2015/C 198/18)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: LFB Biomédicaments SA, Association des déficitaires en Alpha 1 Antitrypsine (Association ADAAT Alpha 1-France) (C-271/14), Pierre Fabre Médicament SA (C-273/14)

Defendants: Ministre des Finances et des Comptes publics, Ministre des Affaires sociales et de la Santé

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6 of Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of measures regulating the pricing of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of national health insurance systems must be interpreted as meaning that the obligation to state reasons provided for in Article 6(3) and (5) is applicable to a decision which restricts the conditions of reimbursement or reduces the level of coverage of a medicinal product by excluding it from the list of proprietary medicinal products covered by compulsory health insurance schemes in addition to services relating to hospital treatment covered by fixed payments in respect of periods of hospitalisation and hospital care.


(1)  OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7520 — Bain Capital/TI Fluid Systems) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, vehicle parts








C_2015122EN.01000601.xml










16.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 122/6





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7520 — Bain Capital/TI Fluid Systems)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 122/07)






1.


On 9 April 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Bain Capital Investors, LLC of the United States (‘Bain Capital’) will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of TI Fluid Systems Limited of the United Kingdom (‘TI’) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Bain Capital is the ultimate general partner of numerous private equity funds. The funds that are part of Bain Capital invest in companies in various industries, including consumer retail and dining, financial and business services, healthcare, industrial and energy, and technology media and telecommunication.










—


TI is a globally active manufacturer of automotive fluid storage, carrying and delivery systems, tank systems, pump and module systems and HVAC (heating, ventilation, air conditioning) fluid systems for light vehicles.














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 M.7520 — Bain Capital/TI Fluid Systems, 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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7459 — Becton Dickinson and Company/CareFusion)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, health care, medical device, merger control, new technology








C_2015122EN.01000101.xml










16.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 122/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7459 — Becton Dickinson and Company/CareFusion)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 122/01)
On 13 March 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 English 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 32015M7459. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-246/14: Order of the General Court of 16 April 2015 — Yoworld v OHIM — Nestlé (yogorino) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015221EN.01001801.xml










6.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/18





Order of the General Court of 16 April 2015 — Yoworld v OHIM — Nestlé (yogorino)
(Case T-246/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate))
(2015/C 221/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Yoworld SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Tornato and D. Hazan, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 December 2013 (Case R 115/2013-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Société des produits Nestlé SA and Yoworld SA.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate in the action.










2.


The applicant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the defendant.






(1)  OJ C 235, 21.7.2014.
Case F-55/15: Action brought on 16 April 2015 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, allowances and expenses, damages, expatriate worker








C_2015213EN.01004501.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/45





Action brought on 16 April 2015 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-55/15)
(2015/C 213/73)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the Commission’s decision, principally, in so far as it withdraws from the applicant the benefit of foreign residence allowance in favour of expatriation allowance and, in the alternative, in so far as it orders the recovery of amounts allegedly unlawfully paid and the compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses allegedly incurred.

Form of order sought







—


Principally, annul the decision of 18 July 2014 in so far as it withdraws from the applicant the benefit of foreign residence allowance in favour of expatriation allowance, retroactively from 1 July 2009;










—


In the alternative, annul the decision of 18 July 2014 in so far as it orders the recovery of amounts allegedly unlawfully paid;










—


Annul the decision of 7 January 2015 rejecting the applicant’s complaint of 12 September 2014, if necessary, and in any event, in the still further alternative, in so far as it refuses to reduce the monthly amounts deducted pursuant to Article 85 of the Statute;










—


Order compensation for the applicant’s pecuniary loss;










—


Order compensation for the applicant’s non-pecuniary loss, calculated as EUR 10  000;










—


Order the defendant to pay all the costs.
Case C-388/13: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria — Hungary) — Proceedings brought by Nemzeti Fogyasztóvédelmi Hatóság (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2005/29/EC — Unfair commercial practices — Erroneous information provided by a telecommunications undertaking to one of its subscribers which resulted in additional costs for the latter — Classification as a ‘misleading commercial practice’)
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer information, customers, disinformation, interpretation of the law, radio telecommunications, restriction on competition, trade information








C_2015198EN.01000302.xml










15.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/3





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria — Hungary) — Proceedings brought by Nemzeti Fogyasztóvédelmi Hatóság
(Case C-388/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2005/29/EC - Unfair commercial practices - Erroneous information provided by a telecommunications undertaking to one of its subscribers which resulted in additional costs for the latter - Classification as a ‘misleading commercial practice’))
(2015/C 198/04)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Kúria

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Nemzeti Fogyasztóvédelmi Hatóság

Defendant: UPC Magyarország Kft.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) must be interpreted as meaning that the communication, by a professional to a consumer, of erroneous information, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, must be classified as a ‘misleading commercial practice’, within the meaning of that directive, even though that information concerned only one single consumer;










2.


Directive 2005/29 must be interpreted as meaning that, if a commercial practice meets all of the criteria specified in Article 6(1) of that directive for classification as a misleading practice in relation to the consumer, it is not necessary further to determine whether such a practice is also contrary to the requirements of professional diligence, as referred to in Article 5(2)(a) of that directive, in order for it legitimately to be regarded as unfair and, consequently, prohibited in accordance with Article 5(1) of that directive.






(1)  OJ C 304, 19.10.2013.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7609 — Omnes Capital/Predica Prévoyance/Quadran/Quadrica) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2015-04-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: company with share capital, economic concentration, energy industry, insurance company, merger control, renewable energy, wind energy








C_2015122EN.01000701.xml










16.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 122/7





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7609 — Omnes Capital/Predica Prévoyance/Quadran/Quadrica)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 122/08)






1.


On 8 April 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Omnes Capital, S.A.S., of France (‘Omnes Capital’), Prédica S.A.S. of France (‘Predica’) and Quadran S.A.S of France (‘Quadran’) will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Quadrica S.A.S of France (‘Quadrica’) by way of purchase of shares and contract of management.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Omnes Capital is a French asset management company active in several branches, notably in the renewable energy sector,










—


Predica is a subsidiary of the Group Crédit Agricole of France and is active in the insurance sector,










—


Quadran is an independent producer of renewable electricity and mainly active in France,










—


Quadrica will hold shares in wind farms which prior to the transaction were held by certain subsidiaries of Quadran.














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.7609 — Omnes Capital/Predica Prévoyance/Quadran/Quadrica, 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.