do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-579/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands)) — P, S v Commissie Sociale Zekerheid Breda, College van Burgemeester en Wethouders van de gemeente Amstelveen (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents — Directive 2003/109/EC — Article 5(2) and Article 11(1) — National legislation imposing on third-country nationals with long-term resident status a civic integration obligation, attested by an examination, under pain of a fine)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, examination, fine, foreign national, immigration, integration of migrants, residence permit








C_2015236EN.01001002.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/10





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands)) — P, S v Commissie Sociale Zekerheid Breda, College van Burgemeester en Wethouders van de gemeente Amstelveen
(Case C-579/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents - Directive 2003/109/EC - Article 5(2) and Article 11(1) - National legislation imposing on third-country nationals with long-term resident status a civic integration obligation, attested by an examination, under pain of a fine))
(2015/C 236/13)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: P, S

Defendants: Commissie Sociale Zekerheid Breda, College van Burgemeester en Wethouders van de gemeente Amstelveen

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents and, in particular, Article 5(2) and Article 11(1) thereof do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes on third-country nationals who already possess long-term resident status the obligation to pass a civic integration examination, under pain of a fine, provided that the means of implementing that obligation are not liable to jeopardise the achievement of the objectives pursued by that directive, which it is for the referring court to determine. Whether the long-term resident status was acquired before or after the obligation to pass a civic integration examination was imposed is irrelevant in that respect.


(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
Notification by Italy of the application of Article 19(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and the Council concerning traffic distribution rules for the airports Milan Malpensa, Milan Linate and Orio al Serio (Bergamo) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Italy
Subjects: EU law - national law, Italy, air transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2015183EN.01000401.xml










4.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 183/4





Notification by Italy of the application of Article 19(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and the Council concerning traffic distribution rules for the airports Milan Malpensa, Milan Linate and Orio al Serio (Bergamo)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 183/05)
Pursuant to Article 19(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community (1), on 23 April 2015 the Commission received notification from Italy of the Ministerial Decree No 395 of 1 October 2014 amending Decree No 15 of 3 March 2000 on the distribution of air traffic within the Milan airport system, as amended (2).
By Commission Decision of 21 December 2000 (3) the Commission had declared as compatible with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes (4) the traffic distribution rules for the Milan airport system set out in the Ministerial Decree No 15 of 3 March 2000 subject to these rules being amended as indicated by the Italian authorities in a letter of 4 December 2000. This amendment took place through the Ministerial Decree No 14 of 5 January 2001.
Ministerial Decree No 395 of 1 October 2014 modifies the traffic distribution rules within the Milan airport system. It removes any limitations at Linate airport on the number of daily return services to EU airports identified on the basis of passenger traffic volume. The limitations with respect to the use of narrow-body (single-aisle) aircraft and the operation of point-to-point scheduled connections at Linate airport remain in place.
The Commission invites interested parties to submit their comments within 15 days of publication of this communication, to:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport (Unit E.4 Internal Market and Airports)




Office: DM24 05/84




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




E-mail: emmanuelle.maire@ec.europa.eu






(1)  OJ L 293, 31.10.2008, p. 3.

(2)  Italian Official Gazette No 237 of 11 October 2014.

(3)  OJ L 58, 28.2.2001, p. 29.

(4)  OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8. Repealed by Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008.
Case T-140/14: Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Bora Creations v OHIM (gel nails at home) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark gel nails at home — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015236EN.01003901.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/39





Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Bora Creations v OHIM (gel nails at home)
(Case T-140/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark gel nails at home - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 236/52)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Bora Creations, SL (Ceuta, Spain) (represented by: R. Lange, G. Hild and E. Schalast, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 December 2013 (Case R 450/2013-1) concerning registration of the word sign gel nails at home as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Bora Creations, SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
Case C-576/14 P: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 — Mirelta Ingatlanhasznosító kft v European Commission, European Ombudsman (Appeal — Action for annulment — Refusal by the Commission to bring proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations — Inadmissibility and lack of jurisdiction of the General Court — Appeal in part manifestly unfounded and in part manifestly inadmissible)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: fundamental rights, infringement of EU law, interpretation of the law, right to justice








C_2015320EN.01001301.xml










28.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/13





Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 — Mirelta Ingatlanhasznosító kft v European Commission, European Ombudsman
(Case C-576/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Action for annulment - Refusal by the Commission to bring proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations - Inadmissibility and lack of jurisdiction of the General Court - Appeal in part manifestly unfounded and in part manifestly inadmissible))
(2015/C 320/18)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Appellant: Mirelta Ingatlanhasznosító kft (represented by: K. Pap, ügyvéd)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, European Ombudsman

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mirelta Ingatlanhasznosító kft shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 73, 2.3.2015.
Case T-562/14: Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Yoo Holdings v OHIM — Eckes-Granini Group (YOO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark YOO — Earlier national and international word marks YO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beverage industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015236EN.01004201.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/42





Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Yoo Holdings v OHIM — Eckes-Granini Group (YOO)
(Case T-562/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark YOO - Earlier national and international word marks YO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 236/56)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Yoo Holdings Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Farnsworth, Solicitor)

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, intervening before the General Court: Eckes-Granini Group GmbH (Nieder-Olm, Germany) (represented by: W. Berlit, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 April 2014 (Case R 762/2013-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Eckes-Granini Group GmbH and Yoo Holdings Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Yoo Holdings Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7611 — IDeA/IP/Hunt/Corin) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, medical device, merger control








C_2015183EN.01000102.xml










4.6.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 183/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7611 — IDeA/IP/Hunt/Corin)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 183/02)
On 28 May 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 32015M7611. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-195/14: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany)) — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V. v Teekanne GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2000/13/EC — Labelling and presentation of foodstuffs — Articles 2(1)(a)(i) and 3(1)(2) — Labelling such as could mislead the purchaser as to the composition of foodstuffs — List of ingredients — Use of the indication ‘raspberry and vanilla adventure’ and of depictions of raspberries and vanilla flowers on the packaging of a fruit tea not containing those ingredients)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: advertising malpractice, consumer information, foodstuff, labelling, tea








C_2015236EN.01001601.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/16





Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany)) — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V. v Teekanne GmbH & Co. KG
(Case C-195/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2000/13/EC - Labelling and presentation of foodstuffs - Articles 2(1)(a)(i) and 3(1)(2) - Labelling such as could mislead the purchaser as to the composition of foodstuffs - List of ingredients - Use of the indication ‘raspberry and vanilla adventure’ and of depictions of raspberries and vanilla flowers on the packaging of a fruit tea not containing those ingredients))
(2015/C 236/22)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V.

Defendant: Teekanne GmbH & Co. KG

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 2(1)(a)(i) and 3(1)(2) of Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 596/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009, must be interpreted as precluding the labelling of a foodstuff and methods used for the labelling from giving the impression, by means of the appearance, description or pictorial representation of a particular ingredient, that that ingredient is present, even though it is not in fact present and this is apparent solely from the list of ingredients on the foodstuff’s packaging.


(1)  OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
Case T-376/13: Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Versorgungswerk der Zahnärztekammer Schleswig-Holstein v ECB (Access to documents — Decision 2004/258/EC — Exchange agreement of 15 February 2012 among Greece and the ECB and the Eurosystem national central banks — Annexes A and B — Partial refusal of access — Public interest — Monetary policy of the European Union and a Member State — Financial situation of the ECB and the Eurosystem national central banks — Stability of the financial system in the European Union)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Central Bank, Greece, access to EU information, exchange of information, monetary policy








C_2015236EN.01003401.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/34





Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Versorgungswerk der Zahnärztekammer Schleswig-Holstein v ECB
(Case T-376/13) (1)

((Access to documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - Exchange agreement of 15 February 2012 among Greece and the ECB and the Eurosystem national central banks - Annexes A and B - Partial refusal of access - Public interest - Monetary policy of the European Union and a Member State - Financial situation of the ECB and the Eurosystem national central banks - Stability of the financial system in the European Union))
(2015/C 236/45)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Versorgungswerk der Zahnärztekammer Schleswig-Holstein (Kiel, Germany) (represented by: O. Hoepner and D. Unrau, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: A. Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, S. Lambrinoc and K. Laurinavičius, acting as Agents, and H.-G. Kamann and P. Gey lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the ECB of 22 May 2013, partially refusing to grant the applicant access to Annexes A and B to the ‘Exchange Agreement dated 15 February 2012 among the Hellenic Republic and the European Central Bank and the Eurosystem NCBs listed herein’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Versorgungswerk der Zahnärztekammer Schleswig-Holstein to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.
Case C-285/14: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France)) — Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects d’Auvergne v Brasserie Bouquet SA (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Directive 92/83/EEC — Excise duty — Beer — Article 4 — Small independent breweries — Reduced rate of excise duty — Conditions — No operation under licence — Production in accordance with a process of a third party and authorised by it — Authorisation to use the trade marks of that third party)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, beer, beverage industry, excise duty, registered trade mark, tax relief, trade-mark law








C_2015236EN.01001802.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/18





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France)) — Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects d’Auvergne v Brasserie Bouquet SA
(Case C-285/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Directive 92/83/EEC - Excise duty - Beer - Article 4 - Small independent breweries - Reduced rate of excise duty - Conditions - No operation under licence - Production in accordance with a process of a third party and authorised by it - Authorisation to use the trade marks of that third party))
(2015/C 236/25)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects d’Auvergne

Defendant: Brasserie Bouquet SA

Operative part of the judgment

For the purpose of applying the reduced rate of excise duty on beer the condition laid down in Article 4(2) of Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages according to which a brewery must not operate under licence, is not met if the brewery concerned makes its beer in accordance with an agreement pursuant to which it is authorised to use the trade marks and production process of a third party.


(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Case C-678/13: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 June 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Poland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — VAT — Directive 2006/112/EC — Annex III — Reduced rate of VAT applicable to medical equipment, aids and other appliances and pharmaceutical products)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, VAT, infringement of EU law, medical device, pharmaceutical product, tax relief








C_2015236EN.01001102.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/11





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 June 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Poland
(Case C-678/13) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Annex III - Reduced rate of VAT applicable to medical equipment, aids and other appliances and pharmaceutical products))
(2015/C 236/15)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Lozano Palacios and D. Milanowska, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by applying a reduced rate of value added tax to supplies:






—


of medical equipment, aids and other appliances which are not reserved for the exclusive personal use of the disabled or which are not normally intended to alleviate or treat disability, and










—


of products which are not pharmaceutical products of a kind normally used for health care, prevention of illnesses and as treatment for medical and veterinary purposes, including products used for contraception and sanitary protection,




under headings 82, 92 and 103 of annex No 3 of the Law on tax on goods and services (Ustawa o podatku od towarów i usług) of 11 March 2004 the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 96 to 98 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with Annex III of that Directive;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the European Commission and the Republic of Poland to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 61, 1.3.2014.