do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-668/13: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Suceava — Romania) — Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Botoşani v Evangeli Paraskevopoulou (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Identical question referred — Social security for migrant workers — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Article 7(2)(c) — Applicability of social security conventions between Member States — Repatriated refugee whose country of origin is a Member State — Completion of periods of employment in the territory of another Member State — Application for grant of an old-age benefit — Refusal)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: international convention, migrant worker, political refugee, refugee, retired person, social-security benefit








C_2015213EN.01001201.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/12





Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Suceava — Romania) — Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Botoşani v Evangeli Paraskevopoulou
(Case C-668/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Identical question referred - Social security for migrant workers - Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 - Article 7(2)(c) - Applicability of social security conventions between Member States - Repatriated refugee whose country of origin is a Member State - Completion of periods of employment in the territory of another Member State - Application for grant of an old-age benefit - Refusal))
(2015/C 213/17)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Suceava

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Botoşani

Defendant: Evangeli Paraskevopoulou

Operative part of the order

Article 7(2)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1992/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006, must be interpreted as meaning that a bilateral agreement, relating to the social security benefits of nationals of one of the signatory States having had the status of political refugees in the territory of the other signatory State, concluded on a date when one of the two signatory States had not yet acceded to the European Union and not appearing in Annex III to that regulation, does not continue to apply to the situation of political refugees repatriated to their State of origin before the bilateral agreement was concluded and that regulation entered into force.


(1)  OJ C 85, 22.3.2014.
Case F-105/14: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 22 April 2015 — ED v ENISA (Civil service — Temporary staff member — Selection procedure — Decision rejecting an application, during the pre-selection stage, following examination by a selection board — No complaint lodged within the time-limit laid down in the Staff Regulations against the decision rejecting the application — Request for information — Reply from the authority authorised to conclude employment contracts not including a review of the decision rejecting the application — Complaint lodged against that reply — Failure to comply with the pre-litigation procedure — Manifest inadmissibility — Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, competition (EU), legal profession, public service, staff regulations (EU), temporary employment








C_2015190EN.01003202.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/32






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 22 April 2015 — ED v ENISA
(Case F-105/14) (1)

((Civil service - Temporary staff member - Selection procedure - Decision rejecting an application, during the pre-selection stage, following examination by a selection board - No complaint lodged within the time-limit laid down in the Staff Regulations against the decision rejecting the application - Request for information - Reply from the authority authorised to conclude employment contracts not including a review of the decision rejecting the application - Complaint lodged against that reply - Failure to comply with the pre-litigation procedure - Manifest inadmissibility - Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2015/C 190/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ED (represented by: S.A. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA) (represented by: A. Ryan, acting as Agent, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Action for the annulment of the decision not to retain the applicant’s application for the post of ‘Legal Officer’ in response to Vacancy Notice ENISA-TA-AD-2013-05.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


ED shall bear her own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security.






(1)  
            OJ C 7 of 12.1.2015, p. 53.
Extension of the period of validity of the lists of suitable candidates
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European security, administrator, common security and defence policy, competition (EU), information technology, public contract, translation








CA2015130EN.01000101.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 130/1





Extension of the period of validity of the lists of suitable candidates
(2015/C 130 A/01)
 
By decision of the Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union, the validity of the shortlists of suitable candidates, drawn up following the open competitions listed below, is extended until 31 December 2015:







Council/420/AD5



to establish a reserve recruitment list of junior administrators in the field of security (Private Office/Security: external security/mission protection), the notice of which was published in 
Official Journal of the European Union C 316 A of 13 December 2005.





Council/421/AD5



to establish a reserve recruitment list of junior administrators in the field of security (Private Office/Security: Internal Protection Service), the notice of which was published in 
Official Journal of the European Union C 316 A of 13 December 2005.





CONS/AD/430


(two profiles)



to establish a reserve recruitment list of senior administrators in the field of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). The competition concerns two AD 9 profiles (Profile 1: senior strategic planners for crisis management operations and missions; Profile 2: senior capability development planners: military/civilian/space), the notice of which was published in 
Official Journal of the European Union C 178 A of 15 July 2008.





CONS-COMM/AD/433



to establish a reserve recruitment list of heads of unit (AD 12) in the field of translation having Irish as their main language, the notice of which was published in 
Official Journal of the European Union C 99 A of 30 April 2009.
Case C-646/13: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Galați — Romania) — Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Brăila v E.S. (Reference fora preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Social security for migrant workers — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Article 8(1) — Applicability of social security conventions between Member States — Repatriated refugee originating in a Member State — Completion of periods of employment within the territory of another Member State — Application for the grant of an old-age benefit — Application refused)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: international convention, migrant worker, political refugee, refugee, retired person, social-security benefit, social-security harmonisation








C_2015213EN.01001101.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/11





Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Galați — Romania) — Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Brăila v E.S.
(Case C-646/13) (1)

((Reference fora preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Social security for migrant workers - Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 - Article 8(1) - Applicability of social security conventions between Member States - Repatriated refugee originating in a Member State - Completion of periods of employment within the territory of another Member State - Application for the grant of an old-age benefit - Application refused))
(2015/C 213/16)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Galați

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Brăila

Respondent: E.S.

Operative part of the order

Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 988/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that a bilateral convention on social security benefits for nationals of one of the signatory States who had political-refugee status within the territory of the other signatory State, which was concluded at a date on which one of the two signatory States had not yet acceded to the European Union and which does not feature in Annex II to that regulation, does not remain applicable to the situation of political refugees repatriated to their State of origin prior to the conclusion of the bilateral convention and the entry into force of that regulation.


(1)  OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
Case C-120/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 April 2015 — Christoph Klein v European Commission (Appeal — Non-contractual liability — Directive 93/42/EEC — Articles 8 and 18 — Medical devices — Inaction by the Commission following notification of a decision to prohibit placing on the market — Limitation period — Suspensory effect of an application for legal aid on the limitation period — Safeguard clause procedure)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: indemnification, market approval, medical device, protective clause








C_2015205EN.01001102.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/11





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 April 2015 — Christoph Klein v European Commission
(Case C-120/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Non-contractual liability - Directive 93/42/EEC - Articles 8 and 18 - Medical devices - Inaction by the Commission following notification of a decision to prohibit placing on the market - Limitation period - Suspensory effect of an application for legal aid on the limitation period - Safeguard clause procedure))
(2015/C 205/15)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Christoph Klein (represented by: H. Ahlt and M. Ahlt, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Sipos and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Klein v Commission (T-309/10, EU:T:2014:19) in so far as, by that judgment, the General Court dismissed the action in that it sought that the European Commission be ordered to pay compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by Mr Christoph Klein from 15 September 2006;










2.


dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;










3.


refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










4.


reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 184, 16.06.2014.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7536 — Allianz/AIMCo/UTA/Porterbrook) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, insurance company, investment company, machine-tool industry, merger control








C_2015130EN.01000101.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 130/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7536 — Allianz/AIMCo/UTA/Porterbrook)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 130/01)
On 31 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 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 32015M7536. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015130EN.01000701.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 130/7





Euro exchange rates (1)

21 April 2015
(2015/C 130/06)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0700




JPY


Japanese yen


127,75




DKK


Danish krone


7,4610




GBP


Pound sterling


0,71870




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2863




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0252




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,4250




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,418




HUF


Hungarian forint


297,41




PLN


Polish zloty


3,9683




RON


Romanian leu


4,4374




TRY


Turkish lira


2,8755




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3821




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3085




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2926




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,3884




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4443




KRW


South Korean won


1 158,82




ZAR


South African rand


12,9576




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,6358




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5770




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


13 865,38




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,8859




PHP


Philippine peso


47,329




RUB


Russian rouble


57,4375




THB


Thai baht


34,631




BRL


Brazilian real


3,2423




MXN


Mexican peso


16,5053




INR


Indian rupee


67,3091






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-598/13: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Suceava — Romania) — Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Botoşani v Polixeni Guletsou (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Identical question referred — Social security for migrant workers — Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 — Article 7(2)(c) — Applicability of social security conventions between Member States — Repatriated refugee whose country of origin is a Member State — Completion of periods of employment in the territory of another Member State — Application for grant of an old-age benefit — Refusal)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: international convention, migrant worker, political refugee, refugee, retired person, social-security benefit








C_2015213EN.01001002.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/10





Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Suceava — Romania) — Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Botoşani v Polixeni Guletsou
(Case C-598/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Identical question referred - Social security for migrant workers - Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 - Article 7(2)(c) - Applicability of social security conventions between Member States - Repatriated refugee whose country of origin is a Member State - Completion of periods of employment in the territory of another Member State - Application for grant of an old-age benefit - Refusal))
(2015/C 213/15)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Suceava

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Casa Judeţeană de Pensii Botoşani

Defendant: Polixeni Guletsou

Operative part of the order

Article 7(2)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1992/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006, must be interpreted as meaning that a bilateral agreement, relating to the social security benefits of nationals of one of the signatory States having had the status of political refugees in the territory of the other signatory State, concluded on a date when one of the two signatory States had not yet acceded to the European Union and not appearing in Annex III to that regulation, does not continue to apply to the situation of political refugees repatriated to their State of origin before the bilateral agreement was concluded and that regulation entered into force.


(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
Case C-181/15 P: Appeal brought on 22 April 2015 by Marpefa, S.L. against the order of 3 February 2015 of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) in Case T-708/14, Marpefa v OHIM
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, automatic game, micro-computer, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015381EN.01001201.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/12





Appeal brought on 22 April 2015 by Marpefa, S.L. against the order of 3 February 2015 of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) in Case T-708/14, Marpefa v OHIM
(Case C-181/15 P)
(2015/C 381/14)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Marpefa, S.L. (represented by: I. Barroso Sánchez-Lafuente, abogado)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs),
Kabushiki Kaisha Sony Computer Entertainment
By order of 6 October 2015, the Court of Justice (Seventh Chamber) dismissed the appeal.
Case T-337/14: Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Rezon v OHIM — mobile.international (mobile.de proMotor) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark mobile.de proMotor — Prior national figurative mark mobile — Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity — Article 165(4)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015190EN.01001501.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/15






Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Rezon v OHIM — mobile.international (mobile.de proMotor)
(Case T-337/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark mobile.de proMotor - Prior national figurative mark mobile - Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity - Article 165(4)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 190/18)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Rezon OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: P. Kanchev and T. Ignatova, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: mobile.international GmbH (Kleinmachnow, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 February 2014 (Case R 950/2013-1) concerning invalidity proceedings between Rezon OOD and mobile.international GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rezon OOD to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council fixing the adjustment rate provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 for direct payments in respect of calendar year 2015 [COM(2015) 141 final — 2015/0070 COD]
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EAGF, agricultural situation, aid to agriculture, financial control, management audit, single payment scheme, structural adjustment








C_2015291EN.01006001.xml










4.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 291/60





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council fixing the adjustment rate provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 for direct payments in respect of calendar year 2015
[COM(2015) 141 final — 2015/0070 COD]
(2015/C 291/09)
On 7 April 2015, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43(2) of the TFEU, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council fixing the adjustment rate provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 for direct payments in respect of calendar year 2015

[COM(2015) 141 final — 2015/0070 COD].
Since the Committee has already set out its views on the content of the proposal in question in its opinions in OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 143, adopted on 22 May 2013 (1) and OJ C 424, 26.11.2014, p. 73, adopted on 5 June 2014 (2), it decided, at its 507th plenary session of 22 and 23 April 2015 (meeting of 22 April), by 152 votes to 2 with 7 abstentions, not to draw up a new opinion on the subject, but to refer to the position it had taken in the above-mentioned documents.

Brussels, 22 April 2015.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Henri MALOSSE




(1)  EESC opinion on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate to direct payments provided for in Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2013 (OJ C 271, 19.9.2013, p. 143).

(2)  EESC opinion on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fixing an adjustment rate for direct payments provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 in respect of calendar year 2014 (OJ C 424, 26.11.2014, p. 73).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7478 — Aviva/Friends Life/Tenet) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, financial services, health care, insurance company, merger control, provision of services








C_2015130EN.01000102.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 130/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7478 — Aviva/Friends Life/Tenet)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 130/02)
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 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 32015M7478. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.