do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-201/15: Action brought on 22 April 2015 — Unicorn v OHIM — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015198EN.01004402.xml










15.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 198/44





Action brought on 22 April 2015 — Unicorn v OHIM — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)
(Case T-201/15)
(2015/C 198/61)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Unicorn a.s. (Prague, 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


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

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘UNICORN’ — Community trade mark No 5 992 805

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 February 2015 in Case R 1699/2014-5

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 did not take into consideration evidence in Czech;










—


OHIM incorrectly considered good reputation of the earlier trademarks.
Case F-60/15: Action brought on 22 April 2015 — ZZ v OHIM
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, damages, dismissal, temporary employment








C_2015213EN.01004802.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/48





Action brought on 22 April 2015 — ZZ v OHIM
(Case F-60/15)
(2015/C 213/78)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

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

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of the President of OHIM of 4 June 2014 terminating the applicant’s contract as a member of the temporary staff, a claim to be reinstated by OHIM if possible, and if not, to receive fair financial compensation for the alleged unlawful termination of his contract, and finally a claim for damages and interest for the non-material harm allegedly suffered.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the President of OHIM of 4 June 2014 terminating the applicant’s contract as a member of the temporary staff;










—


Consequently, order the reinstatement of the applicant and order the defendant (i) by way of damages and interest, to pay the applicant the remuneration in respect of the period from the date on which the termination of his contract took effect until the date of his reinstatement on account of the annulment of the decision taken and (ii) to reconstitute the applicant’s career unlawfully halted by the decision to terminate his contract;










—


in the alternative, in the event that the applicant’s reinstatement results in significant practical difficulties or is excessive with regard to the situation of a third party, order the defendant to pay fair financial compensation for the unlawful termination of the applicant’s contract, taking into account not only the loss of remuneration with regard to the past but also the applicant’s genuine opportunity to remain in the service of OHIM until retirement age under a contract for an indeterminate period and to develop in his career;










—


in any event, order the defendant to pay damages and interest to compensate for the non-material harm suffered, assessed on equitable principles at EUR 15  000;










—


order OHIM to pay all the costs.
Case T-190/12: Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Tomana and Others v Council and Commission (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures imposed on certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Zimbabwe — Restrictions on entry into and transit through the European Union — Freezing of funds — Legal basis — Manifest error of assessment — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Fundamental rights — Proportionality)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Zimbabwe, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, free movement of persons, international sanctions, principle of proportionality, removal, rights of the defence








C_2015190EN.01001001.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/10






Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Tomana and Others v Council and Commission
(Case T-190/12) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures imposed on certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Zimbabwe - Restrictions on entry into and transit through the European Union - Freezing of funds - Legal basis - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Fundamental rights - Proportionality))
(2015/C 190/11)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Johannes Tomana (Harare, Zimbabwe) and the 120 other applicants named in the annex to the judgment (represented by: initially by D. Vaughan QC, M. Lester and R. Lööf, Barristers, and by M. O’Kane, Solicitor, and subsequently by D. Vaughan, M. Lester and M. Lööf)

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen, M. Veiga and A. Vitro, Agents); European Commission (represented by M. Konstantinidis, T. Scharf and E. Georgieva, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: E. Jenkinson, C. Murrell and M. Holt, Agents, and by S. Lee, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Decision 2012/97/CFSP of 17 February 2012 amending Decision 2011/101/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe (OJ 2012 L 47, p. 50), Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 151/2012 of 21 February 2012 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures against Zimbabwe (OJ 2012 L 49, p. 2), and Council Implementing Decision 2012/124/CFSP of 27 February 2012 implementing Decision 2011/101/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe (OJ 2012 L 54, p. 20), in so far as those acts concern the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Johannes Tomana and the 120 other applicants listed in the annex hereto to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union and the European Commission;










3.


Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 194, 30.6.2012.
Case C-182/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 22 April 2015 — Aleksei Petruhhin
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, discrimination on the basis of nationality, extradition, human rights, international agreement, national, third country








C_2015205EN.01002301.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/23





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 22 April 2015 — Aleksei Petruhhin
(Case C-182/15)
(2015/C 205/31)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Aleksei Petruhhin

Other party to the proceedings: Latvijas Republikas Ģenerālprokuratūra

Questions referred







1.


Are the first paragraph of Article 18 and Article 21(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of extradition of a citizen of any Member State of the European Union to a non-Member State under an extradition agreement concluded between a Member State and a third country, the same level of protection must be guaranteed as is guaranteed to a citizen of the Member State in question?










2.


In those circumstances, must the court of the Member State to which the request for extradition has been made apply the conditions for extradition of the EU State of which the person concerned is a citizen or of that in which he has his habitual residence?










3.


In cases in which extradition must be carried out without taking into consideration the specific level of protection established for the citizens of the State to which the request for extradition has been made, must the Member State to which the request for extradition has been made verify compliance with the safeguards established in Article 19 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, that is, that no one may be extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment? May such verification be limited to checking that the State requesting extradition is a party to the Convention against Torture or is it necessary to check the factual situation by taking into consideration the evaluation of that State carried out by the bodies of the Council of Europe?
Case T-320/09: Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Planet v Commission (Protection of the financial interests of the Union — Early warning system (EWS) enabling identification of the level of risk associated with contractors — OLAF enquiry into the performance of a public contract concerning an institutional modernisation project in Syria — Decisions to activate W1a and W1b warnings — Legal basis — Fundamental rights — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, European Anti-fraud Office, Syria, fraud against the EU, modernisation aid, public contract








C_2015190EN.01000801.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/8






Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Planet v Commission
(Case T-320/09) (1)

((Protection of the financial interests of the Union - Early warning system (EWS) enabling identification of the level of risk associated with contractors - OLAF enquiry into the performance of a public contract concerning an institutional modernisation project in Syria - Decisions to activate W1a and W1b warnings - Legal basis - Fundamental rights - Obligation to state reasons))
(2015/C 190/08)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Planet AE Anonymi Etairia Parochis Simvouleftikon Ipiresion (Athens, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and F. Dintilhac, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decisions of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) requesting the applicant’s registration in the early warning system (‘EWS’), by activation initially of a W1a warning and subsequently of a W1b warning.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decisions of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) requesting the registration of Planet AE Anonymi Etairia Parochis Simvouleftikon Ipiresion in the early warning system (EWS), and those of the European Commission concerning the activation of a W1a warning and a W1b warning concerning that undertaking;










2.


Orders the Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.
Case C-357/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Krakowie — Poland) — Drukarnia Multipress sp. z o.o. v Minister Finansów (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Directive 2008/7/EC — Article 2(1)(b) and (c) — Indirect taxes on the raising of capital — Subjection to capital duty — Contributions of capital to a partnership limited by shares — Classification of such a partnership as a capital company)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: company with share capital, indirect tax, limited partnership, tax on capital








C_2015205EN.01000301.xml










22.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/3





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Krakowie — Poland) — Drukarnia Multipress sp. z o.o. v Minister Finansów
(Case C-357/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Directive 2008/7/EC - Article 2(1)(b) and (c) - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Subjection to capital duty - Contributions of capital to a partnership limited by shares - Classification of such a partnership as a capital company))
(2015/C 205/03)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Krakowie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Drukarnia Multipress sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Minister Finansów

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1)(b) and (c) of Council Directive 2008/7/EC of 12 February 2008 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital must be interpreted as meaning that a partnership limited by shares under Polish law must be regarded as a capital company within the meaning of that provision even if only some of its capital and members are able to satisfy the conditions laid down by that provision.


(1)  OJ C 274, 21.9.2013.
Information to be provided pursuant to Article 5(2) — Establishment of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) (Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19))
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: The Member States
Subjects: France, Spain, cross-border cooperation, cultural heritage, cultural tourism, economic and social cohesion, heritage protection, information technology, local authority, pollution control measures








C_2015130EN.01000801.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 130/8





Information to be provided pursuant to Article 5(2)
Establishment of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC)
(Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19))
(2015/C 130/07)
I.1.   Name, address and contact point







Registered name:


Huesca Pirineos-Hautes Pyrénées




Registered office:


Porches de Galicia 4, 22002 Huesca, Spain




Contact point:


Att. Pedro Salas Parra




Tel.


+34 974294115




Fax:


+34 974294129




E-mail:


psalas@dphuesca.es




Internet:


www.hp-hp.eu




I.2.   Duration of the grouping








Duration of the grouping


:


Until 2 November 2004




Date of registration


:


11 November 2004




Date of publication


:


21 November 2004




II.   Objectives

To manage territorial cooperation projects as part of local authority initiatives to promote tourism, culture, heritage, the environment, local development, efficient use of energy to reduce carbon emissions, information and communication technologies and innovation.
III.   Additional details concerning the name of the grouping








Name in Spanish — French


:


Huesca Pirineos-Hautes Pyrénées




Abbreviation or acronym


:


HP-HP




IV.   Members

IV.1.   Total number of members in the grouping: 2
IV.2.   Nationalities of the members of the Grouping: Spanish, French
IV.3.   Member information







Official name:


Diputación Provincial de Huesca (Provincial authority of Huesca)




Postal address:


Porches de Galicia 4, 22002 Huesca, Spain




Contact point:


Att. Pedro Salas Parra




Tel.


+34 974294115




Fax:


+34 974294129




E-mail:


psalas@dphuesca.es




Internet:


www.dphuesca.es




Type of member:


Local authority




NUTS code:


ES241










Official name:


Département des Hautes-Pyrénées (Department of Hautes-Pyrénées)




Postal address:


Hôtel du Département, 8 rue Gaston Manent, BP 1324, 65013 Tarbes, France




Contact point:


Att. Larroche, Jean-Michel




Tel.


+33 562567865




Fax:


+33 562567866




E-mail:


jean-michel.larroche@cg65.fr




Internet:


www.cg65.fr




Type of member:


Local authority




NUTS code:


FR 626
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7558 — DS Smith/Duropack) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, packaging product, pulp and paper industry








C_2015130EN.01001201.xml










22.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 130/12





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7558 — DS Smith/Duropack)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 130/09)






1.


On 15 April 2015 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which DS Smith plc (‘DS Smith’, United Kingdom) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Duropack GmbH (‘Duropack’, Austria) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for DS Smith: active in the production and supply of corrugated case material, corrugated sheet, corrugated cases and partitions in the EEA,
—   for Duropack: active in the production and supply of corrugated case material, corrugated sheet, corrugated cases and partitions in the EEA.










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.










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.7558 — DS Smith/Duropack, 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’).
Case T-290/12: Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Republic of Poland v European Commission (Agriculture — Common organisation of markets — Processed fruit and vegetables sectors — Aid to producer groups — Limitation on the Union’s financial participation — Legal certainty — Legitimate expectations — Obligation to state reasons — Sincere cooperation)
Date: 2015-04-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: aid to agriculture, common organisation of markets, fruit, infringement of EU law, principle of legal certainty, processed foodstuff, production aid, vegetable








C_2015190EN.01001101.xml










8.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/11






Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Republic of Poland v European Commission
(Case T-290/12) (1)

((Agriculture - Common organisation of markets - Processed fruit and vegetables sectors - Aid to producer groups - Limitation on the Union’s financial participation - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Obligation to state reasons - Sincere cooperation))
(2015/C 190/12)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: initially by B. Majczyna and M. Szpunar, and subsequently by B. Majczyna and K. Straś, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially by N. Donnelly, B. Schima and D. Milanowska, and subsequently by D. Milanowska and B. Schima, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Article 1(2) to (4), (6), (12) and (13), Article 2(1) to (3), read in conjunction with Article 3 of, and Annexes I and II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 302/2012 of 4 April 2012 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (OJ 2011 L 99, p. 21).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Republic of Poland to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  
            OJ C 250, 18.8.2012.