do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-77/15: Action brought on 18 May 2015 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2015-05-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, allowances and expenses, expatriate worker, interest








C_2015245EN.01005102.xml










27.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/51





Action brought on 18 May 2015 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-77/15)
(2015/C 245/65)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision to limit the retroactive payment of the expatriation allowance to a period of five years, from the date on which the failure to pay that allowance was discovered and an order against the defendant to pay default interest.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) to limit the payment of the expatriation allowance, which had been wrongly omitted since 1 September 2007, to a period of five years;










—


order the Commission to pay to the applicant the expatriation allowances that he has been entitled to since 1 September 2007 plus default interest calculated at the rate laid down by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations, increased by two percentage points on the sums already paid to the applicant by way of arrears of remuneration (expatriation allowance) and on those sums still due, from their respective due date until full payment;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case F-89/15: Action brought on 18th May 2015 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2015-05-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, building industry, competition (EU), construction policy, damages, staff regulations (EU)








C_2015279EN.01006201.xml










24.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/62






Action brought on 18th May 2015 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-89/15)
(2015/C 279/80)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: G.-M. Enache, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision not to include the applicant on the reserve list of competition EPSO/AD/248/13 and claim for compensation in respect of the material and non-material damage allegedly sustained.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the Decision of the Appointing Authority regarding the complaint lodged by the applicant under Article 90(2) of the Staff regulations contesting the decision of the selection board not to include his name on the reserve list of competition EPSO/AD/248/13;










—


annulment of the Decision of the selection board on the request for review submitted by the applicant in competition EPSO/AD/248/13;










—


annulment of the Decision of the selection board in open competition EPSO/AD/248/13 not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list for Open Competition EPSO/AD/248/13;










—


compensate the material and moral damages suffered. Material damages are estimated by the applicant at 50  000 euros, representing loss caused by difference between the basic salary he would have been entitled to once recruited from the reserve list and his actual basic salary he remained on. Moral damages estimated at 50  000 euros for the burden posed to the applicant due to the efforts in and personal time wasted out unnecessarily for dealing with the situation and for staying apart from his family whereas he would have had the chance by being recruited from the reserve list and reunited with his family members;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case T-560/14: Order of the General Court of 18 May 2015 — ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding and Others v Parliament and Council (Action for annulment — Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 — Measures concerning compliance by users in the Union with the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation — Lack of individual concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2015-05-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: biodiversity, exploitation of resources, genetics, plant variety right








C_2015228EN.01001401.xml










13.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 228/14





Order of the General Court of 18 May 2015 — ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding and Others v Parliament and Council
(Case T-560/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 - Measures concerning compliance by users in the Union with the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility))
(2015/C 228/17)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding BV (Hoorn NH, Netherlands) and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the order (represented by: P. de Jong, P. Vlaemminck and B. Van Vooren, lawyers)

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: L. Visaggio, J. Rodrigues and R. Van de Westelaken, acting as Agents) and Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Moore and M. Simm, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation in the Union (OJ 2014 L 150, p. 59).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


There is no need to rule on the application for leave to intervene lodged by the European Seed Association (ESA) and the Association internationale des producteurs de l’horticulture (AIPH).










3.


ABZ Aardbeien Uit Zaad Holding BV and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.






(1)  OJ C 388, 3.11.2014.
Case C-223/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 18 May 2015 — combit Software GmbH v Commit Business Solutions Ltd
Date: 2015-05-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015294EN.01001701.xml










7.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/17






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 18 May 2015 — combit Software GmbH v Commit Business Solutions Ltd
(Case C-223/15)
(2015/C 294/22)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: combit Software GmbH

Defendant: Commit Business Solutions Ltd

Question referred
                   (1)

In determining the likelihood of confusion of a Community word mark, what is the significance of a situation in which, from the perspective of the average consumer in some Member States, the aural similarity of the Community trade mark with another sign claimed to infringe that trade mark is eliminated by a difference in meaning, whereas from the perspective of the average consumer in other Member States it is not:






(a)


In determining the likelihood of confusion is the perspective of some Member States, of the other Member States, or that of a fictive EU average consumer decisive?










(b)


If there is a likelihood of confusion only in some Member States, has the Community trade mark been infringed across the European Union, or must the Member States be differentiated individually?






(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version) (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).