do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-15/13: Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Group Nivelles v OHIM — Easy Sanitary Solutions (Shower drain conduit) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered design representing a shower drain conduit — Earlier design — Grounds for invalidity — Novelty — Individual character — Visible characteristic of the earlier design — Goods at issue — Articles 4 to 7, 19 and 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, designs and models, plumbing equipment, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015213EN.01003001.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/30





Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Group Nivelles v OHIM — Easy Sanitary Solutions (Shower drain conduit)
(Case T-15/13) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered design representing a shower drain conduit - Earlier design - Grounds for invalidity - Novelty - Individual character - Visible characteristic of the earlier design - Goods at issue - Articles 4 to 7, 19 and 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))
(2015/C 213/51)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Group Nivelles (Gingelom, Belgium) (represented by: H. Jonkhout, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Bonne and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Easy Sanitary Solutions BV (Losser, Netherlands) (represented by: F. Eijsvogels, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 October 2012 (Case R 2004/2010-3) concerning invalidity proceedings between I-drain BVBA and Easy Sanitary Solutions BV.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 4 October 2012 (Case R 2004/2010-3);










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Group Nivelles and Easy Sanitary Solutions BV.






(1)  OJ C 108, 13.4.2013.
Case T-169/14: Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Ferring v OHIM — Kora (Koragel) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark Koragel — Earlier Community word mark CHORAGON — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015213EN.01003502.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/35





Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Ferring v OHIM — Kora (Koragel)
(Case T-169/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Koragel - Earlier Community word mark CHORAGON - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 213/59)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ferring BV (Hoofddorp, Netherlands) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Kora Corp. Ltd (Swords, Ireland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 January 2014 (Case No R 721/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Ferring BV and Kora Corp. Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ferring BV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015158EN.01000501.xml










13.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 158/5





Euro exchange rates (1)

12 May 2015
(2015/C 158/04)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1239




JPY


Japanese yen


134,85




DKK


Danish krone


7,4630




GBP


Pound sterling


0,71640




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3147




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0396




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,3945




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,394




HUF


Hungarian forint


306,57




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1028




RON


Romanian leu


4,4655




TRY


Turkish lira


3,0245




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4070




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3532




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7133




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5239




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5013




KRW


South Korean won


1 231,25




ZAR


South African rand


13,6327




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9822




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5800




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 844,94




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,0609




PHP


Philippine peso


50,366




RUB


Russian rouble


56,9300




THB


Thai baht


37,939




BRL


Brazilian real


3,4514




MXN


Mexican peso


17,3215




INR


Indian rupee


72,2546






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-392/13: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 May 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Barcelona — Spain) — Andrés Rabal Cañas v Nexea Gestión Documental SA, Fondo de Garantía Salarial (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Collective redundancies — Directive 98/59/EC — Meaning of ‘establishment’ — Method of calculating the number of workers made redundant)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: collective dismissal, establishment, social policy, temporary employment, work contract








C_2015236EN.01000401.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/4





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 May 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Barcelona — Spain) — Andrés Rabal Cañas v Nexea Gestión Documental SA, Fondo de Garantía Salarial
(Case C-392/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Collective redundancies - Directive 98/59/EC - Meaning of ‘establishment’ - Method of calculating the number of workers made redundant))
(2015/C 236/05)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social No 33 de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Andrés Rabal Cañas

Defendants: Nexea Gestión Documental SA, Fondo de Garantía Salarial

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 1(1)(a) of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies must be interpreted as precluding national legislation that introduces the undertaking and not the establishment as the sole reference unit, where the effect of the application of that criterion is to preclude the information and consultation procedure provided for in Articles 2 to 4 of that directive, when the dismissals in question would have been considered ‘collective redundancies’, under the definition in Article 1(1)(a) of that directive, had the establishment been used as the reference unit.










2.


Article 1(1) of Directive 98/59 must be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of establishing whether ‘collective redundancies’, within the meaning of that provision, have been effected, there is no need to take into account individual terminations of contracts of employment concluded for limited periods of time or for specific tasks, when those terminations take place on the date of expiry of the contract or on the date on which that task was completed.










3.


Article 1(2)(a) of Directive 98/59 must be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of establishing the existence of collective redundancies effected under contracts of employment concluded for limited periods of time or for specific tasks, it is not necessary for the cause of such collective redundancies to derive from the same collective contractual framework for the same duration or the same task.






(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.
Commission Decision of 13 May 2015 prolonging the appointment of independent scientific experts to the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: appointment of members, committee (EU), drug surveillance, health care profession, scientific profession








C_2015161EN.01000501.xml










14.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/5





COMMISSION DECISION
of 13 May 2015
prolonging the appointment of independent scientific experts to the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 161/04)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (1), and in particular Article 61a(1) and (4) thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


Article 61a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 requires that the Commission appoints six independent scientific experts as members of the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee.










(2)


Article 61a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 provides that the Commission is to appoint those members with a view to ensuring that the relevant expertise is available within the Committee.










(3)


The members of the Committee are to be appointed for a period of three years, which may be prolonged once.










(4)


By its decision of 21 June 2012, the Commission appointed six independent scientific experts for a term of three years from 2 July 2012. In view of the continuous and efficient contribution of those experts to the work of the Committee, their mandate should be prolonged in accordance with Article 61a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 for a period of three years starting on 2 July 2015.










(5)


Where an independent scientific expert appointed by this decision is no longer capable of contributing efficiently to the work of the Committee, or resigns, the Commission may replace this member from the reserve list, for the remaining duration of the member’s mandate,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The appointment of the following members of the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee is hereby prolonged for a term of three years from 2 July 2015:






—


Jane Ahlqvist RASTAD,










—


Marie Louise DE BRUIN,










—


Stephen J. W. EVANS,










—


Brigitte KELLER-STANISLAWSKI,










—


Hervé LE LOUET,










—


Lennart WALDENLIND.




Article 2
The following are hereby placed on a reserve list by order of merit:






—


Thierry TRENQUE,










—


Michael THEODORAKIS,










—


Marie-Christine PERAULT-POCHAT,










—


Annemarie HVIDBERG HELLEBEK.





Done at Brussels, 13 May 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Vytenis ANDRIUKAITIS

Member of the Commission





(1)  OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1.
Case C-221/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Brussel (Belgium) lodged on 13 May 2015 — Openbaar Ministerie v Etablissements Fr. Colruyt NV
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: minimum price, retail price, retail selling, retail trade, stamp duty, tobacco, tobacco industry








C_2015262EN.01000502.xml










10.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/5





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Brussel (Belgium) lodged on 13 May 2015 — Openbaar Ministerie v Etablissements Fr. Colruyt NV
(Case C-221/15)
(2015/C 262/07)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Beroep te Brussel

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Openbaar Ministerie

Respondent: Etablissements Fr. Colruyt NV

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 15(1) of Directive 2011/64/EU (1), whether or not read in conjunction with Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2) of 7 December 2000, preclude a national measure which requires retailers to respect minimum prices by prohibiting the application of a price for tobacco products which is lower than the price that the manufacturer/importer has affixed to the revenue stamp?










2.


Does Article 34 TFEU preclude a national measure which requires retailers to respect minimum prices by prohibiting the application of a price for tobacco products which is lower than the price that the manufacturer/importer has affixed to the revenue stamp?










3.


Does Article 4(3) TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 101 TFEU, preclude a national measure which requires retailers to respect minimum prices by prohibiting the application of a price for tobacco products which is lower than the price that the manufacturer/importer has affixed to the revenue stamp?






(1)  Council Directive of 21 June 2011 on the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco (OJ 2011 L 176, p. 24).

(2)  OJ 2000 C 364, p. 1.
Case C-536/13: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 13 May 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas (Lithuania)) — ‘Gazprom’ OAO (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Scope — Arbitration — Not included — Recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards — Order issued by an arbitral tribunal having its seat in a Member State — Order that proceedings not be brought or continued before a court of another Member State — Power of the courts of a Member State to refuse to recognise the arbitral award — New York Convention)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arbitration, court of arbitration, enforcement of ruling, international commercial arbitration, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, member country








C_2015236EN.01000801.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/8





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 13 May 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas (Lithuania)) — ‘Gazprom’ OAO
(Case C-536/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Scope - Arbitration - Not included - Recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards - Order issued by an arbitral tribunal having its seat in a Member State - Order that proceedings not be brought or continued before a court of another Member State - Power of the courts of a Member State to refuse to recognise the arbitral award - New York Convention))
(2015/C 236/10)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas

Party to the main proceedings


Applicant:‘Gazprom’ OAO

Interested party: Lietuvos Respublika

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as not precluding a court of a Member State from recognising and enforcing, or from refusing to recognise and enforce, an arbitral award prohibiting a party from bringing certain claims before a court of that Member State, since that regulation does not govern the recognition and enforcement, in a Member State, of an arbitral award issued by an arbitral tribunal in another Member State.


(1)  OJ C 377, 21.12.2013.
Commission Decision of 13 May 2015 on appointing members of the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products to represent patients’ organisations (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Medicines Agency, appointment of members, committee (EU)








C_2015161EN.01000701.xml










14.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/7





COMMISSION DECISION
of 13 May 2015
on appointing members of the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products to represent patients’ organisations
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 161/05)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1999 on orphan medicinal products (1), and in particular Article 4(3) thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


Article 4(3) of the Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 requires that the Commission appoints representatives of patients' organisations for a mandate of three years.










(2)


The term of office of the three members representing patients' organisations expires on 30 June 2015.










(3)


The members of the Committee should be appointed for a period of three years starting 1 July 2015.










(4)


Where a member appointed by this decision is no longer capable of contributing efficiently to the work of the Committee, or resigns, the Commission may replace this member from the reserve list, for the duration of the member's mandate,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The following are hereby appointed members of the Committee for a term of three years, from 1 July 2015:






—


Lesley GREENE,










—


Pauline EVERS,










—


Mario RICCIARDI.




Article 2
The following are hereby placed on a reserve list by order of merit:






—


Julián Isla GÓMEZ,










—


Loris Angelo BRUNETTA,










—


Baiba ZIEMELE.





Done at Brussels, 13 May 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Vytenis ANDRIUKAITIS

Member of the Commission





(1)  OJ L 18, 22.1.2000, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7456 — Imerys/S&B Minerals) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, mining industry








C_2015158EN.01000402.xml










13.5.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 158/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7456 — Imerys/S&B Minerals)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 158/03)
On 19 February 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 32015M7456. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-363/12: Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Harper Hygienics v OHIM — Clinique Laboratories (CLEANIC natural beauty) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark CLEANIC natural beauty — Earlier Community word marks CLINIQUE — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods and services — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier marks — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, polishing and scouring preparations, pulp and paper industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015213EN.01002701.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/27





Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Harper Hygienics v OHIM — Clinique Laboratories (CLEANIC natural beauty)
(Case T-363/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark CLEANIC natural beauty - Earlier Community word marks CLINIQUE - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier marks - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2015/C 213/47)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Harper Hygienics S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: initially R. Rumpel, and subsequently D. Rzążewska and G. Pietras, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Clinique Laboratories, LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: initially V. von Bomhard and A. Renck, lawyers, and K. Hughes, Solicitor, and subsequently K. Hughes)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 May 2012 (Case R 1134/2011-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Clinique Laboratories, LLC and Harper Hygienics S.A.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the action;










2.


orders Harper Hygienics S.A. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Clinique Laboratories, LLC.






(1)  OJ C 355, 17.11.2012.
Case T-102/14: Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Deutsche Post v OHIM — PostNL Holding (TPG POST) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark TPG POST — Earlier national and Community word marks POST and Deutsche Post — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-05-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, postal service, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015213EN.01003501.xml










29.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/35





Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Deutsche Post v OHIM — PostNL Holding (TPG POST)
(Case T-102/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark TPG POST - Earlier national and Community word marks POST and Deutsche Post - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 213/58)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Post AG (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: K. Hamacher and C. Giersdorf, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider and S. Hanne, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: PostNL Holding BV (The Hague, Netherlands)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 December 2013 (Case R 2108/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between PostNL Holding BV and Deutsche Post AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the application.










2.


Orders Deutsche Post AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.