do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-539/14: Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Castellón — Spain) — Juan Carlos Sánchez Morcillo, María del Carmen Abril García v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Directive 93/13/EEC — Article 7 — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Articles 7 and 47 — Consumer contracts — Mortgage loan contract — Unfair terms — Mortgage enforcement proceedings — Right of appeal)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, appeal, consumer protection, enforcement of ruling, real estate credit, unfair terms of contract








C_2015320EN.01001202.xml










28.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/12





Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Castellón — Spain) — Juan Carlos Sánchez Morcillo, María del Carmen Abril García v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA
(Case C-539/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Directive 93/13/EEC - Article 7 - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Articles 7 and 47 - Consumer contracts - Mortgage loan contract - Unfair terms - Mortgage enforcement proceedings - Right of appeal))
(2015/C 320/17)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Castellón

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Juan Carlos Sánchez Morcillo, María del Carmen Abril García

Defendant: Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA

Operative part of the order

Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, read in conjunction with Articles 47, 34(3) and 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a national provision of the kind at issue in the main proceedings, by which the consumer, as a mortgage debtor against whom enforcement proceedings are brought, may bring an appeal against the decision rejecting his objection to the enforcement only when the court of first instance has not upheld an objection based on the unfairness of the contractual term upon which the enforcement is based even though the sellers or suppliers may, by contrast, appeal against any decision terminating proceedings regardless of the ground of objection on which that decision is based.


(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2015.
Case T-296/13: Order of the General Court of 16 July 2015 — Adler Modemärkte v OHIM — Blufin (MARINE BLEU)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015320EN.01005101.xml










28.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/51





Order of the General Court of 16 July 2015 — Adler Modemärkte v OHIM — Blufin (MARINE BLEU)
(Case T-296/13) (1)

(2015/C 320/68)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 226, 3.8.2013.
New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Luxembourg, commemoration, euro, issuing of currency




C_2015232EN.01000701.xml










16.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/7





New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
(2015/C 232/05)



Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuance of euro coins are authorised to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, one of these being that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.


Issuing country
: Luxembourg


Subject of commemoration
: 125th anniversary of the House of Nassau-Weilburg


Description of the design
: On the left of the coin is the effigy of His Royal Highness Grand Duke Henri, and on the right, in a circular arrangement, and in chronological order of their accession to the throne, the portraits of their Royal Highnesses Grand Dukes Adolphe and Guillaume IV, Grand Duchesses Marie-Adélaïde and Charlotte, and Grand Duke Jean. To the right, also in circular format, is the inscription ‘1890 - Dynastie Nassau-Weilbourg’. The name of the issuing country, ‘Luxembourg’, and the year, ‘2015’, run vertically in the centre of the design.
The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.


Number of coins to be issued
: 1,4 million


Date of issue
: August 2015


(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).
Case C-379/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 16 July 2015 — Association France Nature Environnement v Premier ministre, Ministre de l’écologie, du développement durable et de l’énergie
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, EU law - national law, application of EU law, environmental protection, interpretation of the law, ordinary court of law








C_2015337EN.01000501.xml










12.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 337/5





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 16 July 2015 — Association France Nature Environnement v Premier ministre, Ministre de l’écologie, du développement durable et de l’énergie
(Case C-379/15)
(2015/C 337/06)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Association France Nature Environnement

Defendants: Premier ministre, Ministre de l’écologie, du développement durable et de l’énergie

Questions referred







1)


Should a national court, exercising its general jurisdiction under EU law, in all cases request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union so that it can determine whether provisions held by the national court to be contrary to EU law should be maintained temporarily in force?










2)


If the answer to that first question is in the affirmative, is the decision that may be made by the Conseil d’État to maintain, until 1 January 2016, the effects of the provisions of the Article 1 of the Decree of 2 May 2012 concerning the assessment of certain plans and documents having an impact on the environment, which it holds to be illegal, justified in particular by an overriding consideration linked to the protection of the environment?
Case C-468/14: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — European Commission v Kingdom of Denmark (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2001/37/EC — Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products — Articles 2(4) and 8 — Prohibition on the sale of tobacco for oral use — Loose ‘Snus’ (oral tobacco))
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, launching of a product, market approval, tobacco, tobacco industry








C_2015311EN.01001201.xml










21.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/12





Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — European Commission v Kingdom of Denmark
(Case C-468/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2001/37/EC - Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products - Articles 2(4) and 8 - Prohibition on the sale of tobacco for oral use - Loose ‘Snus’ (oral tobacco)))
(2015/C 311/13)
Language of the case: Danish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Cattabriga and M. Clausen, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: C. Thorning and M. Wolff, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


declares that, by having continued to authorise the sale of loose ‘snus’ (oral tobacco), the Kingdom of Denmark has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2(4) in conjunction with Article 8 of Directive 2001/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products, and










2)


orders Kingdom of Denmark to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 439, 8.12.2014.
Case T-574/12: Order of the General Court of 16 July 2015 — PAN Europe and Stichting Natuur en Milieu v Commission (Environment — Regulation (EC) No 149/2008 — Maximum residue levels for pesticides — Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 — Request for internal review — No further interest in bringing an action — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: agricultural waste, consumer protection, food safety, health control, pesticide residue, quantitative restriction








C_2015320EN.01002701.xml










28.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 320/27





Order of the General Court of 16 July 2015 — PAN Europe and Stichting Natuur en Milieu v Commission
(Case T-574/12) (1)

((Environment - Regulation (EC) No 149/2008 - Maximum residue levels for pesticides - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Request for internal review - No further interest in bringing an action - No need to adjudicate))
(2015/C 320/42)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicants: Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussels, Belgium) and Stichting Natuur en Milieu (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: F. Martens, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, B. Burggraaf, P. Ondrůšek and G. von Rintelen, subsequently, B. Burggraaf, G. von Rintelen and P. Oliver, and, lastly, G. von Rintelen, H. Kranenborg and L. Pignataro-Nolin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of 16 October 2012 whereby the Commission dismissed as unfounded the applicants’ requests for internal review of Commission Regulation (EC) No 149/2008 of 29 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing Annexes II, III and IV setting maximum residue levels for products covered by Annex I thereto (OJ 2008 L 58, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) and Stichting Natuur en Milieu shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7660 — KKR/Ursa) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, plastics industry, rubber industry








C_2015232EN.01000102.xml










16.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7660 — KKR/Ursa)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 232/02)
On 8 July 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 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 32015M7660. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-379/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof Den Haag (Netherlands)) — TOP Logistics BV, Van Caem International BV v Bacardi & Company Ltd, Bacardi International Ltd and Bacardi & Company Ltd, Bacardi International Ltd v TOP Logistics BV, Van Caem International BV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Trade marks — Directive 89/104/EEC — Article 5 — Products bearing a trade mark released for free circulation and placed under the duty suspension arrangement without the consent of the proprietor of the trade mark — Right of that proprietor to oppose that placing — Definition of ‘using in the course of trade’)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, excise duty, import (EU), launching of a product, registered trade mark, tax exemption








C_2015302EN.01001101.xml










14.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/11





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof Den Haag (Netherlands)) — TOP Logistics BV, Van Caem International BV v Bacardi & Company Ltd, Bacardi International Ltd and Bacardi & Company Ltd, Bacardi International Ltd v TOP Logistics BV, Van Caem International BV
(Case C-379/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Trade marks - Directive 89/104/EEC - Article 5 - Products bearing a trade mark released for free circulation and placed under the duty suspension arrangement without the consent of the proprietor of the trade mark - Right of that proprietor to oppose that placing - Definition of ‘using in the course of trade’))
(2015/C 302/14)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Gerechtshof Den Haag

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: TOP Logistics BV, Van Caem International BV, Bacardi & Company Ltd, Bacardi International Ltd

Defendants: Bacardi & Company Ltd, Bacardi International Ltd, TOP Logistics BV, Van Caem International BV

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5 of the First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that the proprietor of a trade mark registered in one or more Member States may oppose a third party placing goods bearing that trade mark under the duty suspension arrangement after they have been introduced into the EEA and released for free circulation without the consent of that proprietor.


(1)  OJ C 388, 3.11.2014.
Case C-380/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Illes Balears (Spain) lodged on 16 July 2015 — Francisca Garzón Ramos and José Javier Ramos Martín v Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, S.A., Intercotrans, S.L.
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for annulment, enforcement of ruling, mortgage, right to justice








C_2015354EN.01001301.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/13





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Illes Balears (Spain) lodged on 16 July 2015 — Francisca Garzón Ramos and José Javier Ramos Martín v Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, S.A., Intercotrans, S.L.
(Case C-380/15)
(2015/C 354/16)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Illes Balears

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Francisca Garzón Ramos and José Javier Ramos Martín

Defendants: Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, S.A., Intercotrans, S.L.

Questions referred







1.


In providing that a court seised of ordinary proceedings for the annulment of an enforceable instrument cannot under any circumstances grant interim relief staying mortgage enforcement proceedings relating to the instrument claimed to be null and void, is Article 698(1) of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil compatible with the principle of effective judicial protection affirmed in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (1)?










2.


In the event that the answer to the previous question is that the provision of Spanish law is not compatible with the article of the Charter in question, is the case-law of the Court of Justice, and in particular its judgment in Case C-169/14 (2)
Sánchez Morcillo and Abril García, therefore applicable to this case?






(1)  OJ 2000, C 364, p. 1.

(2)  EU:C:2014:2099.
Case C-459/14: Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — Fadil Cocaj v Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil register, cohabitation, freedom of movement, marriage, residence permit








C_2015398EN.01002303.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/23





Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — Fadil Cocaj v Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal
(Case C-459/14) (1)

(2015/C 398/31)
Language of the case: Hungarian
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.
Case C-145/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Bulgaria (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Environment — Directive 1999/31/EC — Article 14 — Landfill of waste — Non-hazardous waste — Non-conformity of existing landfills)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bulgaria, infringement of EU law, storage of waste, waste, waste disposal








C_2015311EN.01001101.xml










21.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/11





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Bulgaria
(Case C-145/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Environment - Directive 1999/31/EC - Article 14 - Landfill of waste - Non-hazardous waste - Non-conformity of existing landfills))
(2015/C 311/11)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: S. Petrova and E. Sanfrutos Cano, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Bulgaria (represented by E. Petranova and D. Drambozova, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that by failing to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that, as from 16 July 2009, the existing landfills for non-hazardous waste in its territory do not continue to function unless they satisfy the requirements of Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, the Republic of Bulgaria has failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 14(a) to (c) of that directive;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


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






(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.
Corrigendum to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: auditing, financial management, financial regulation, fund (EU), general budget (EU), implementation of the budget, public contract








L_2015188EN.01005501.xml










16.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 188/55







Corrigendum to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 298 of 26 October 2012
)


On page 5, Contents, row concerning Article 110:
for:








‘Article 110

Award criteria for contacts
54,




read:








‘Article 110

Award criteria for contracts
54.
Case C-95/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano (Italy)) — Unione Nazionale Industria Conciaria (UNIC), Unione Nazionale dei Consumatori di Prodotti in Pelle, Materie Concianti, Accessori e Componenti (Unicopel) v FS Retail, Luna srl, Gatsby srl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of goods — Articles 34, 35 and 36 TFEU — Measures having equivalent effect — Directive 94/11/EC — Articles 3 and 5 — Exhaustive harmonisation — Bar on impeding the placing on the market of footwear which complies with the labelling requirements of Directive 94/11 — National legislation requiring the country of origin to be shown on the labelling of products manufactured abroad which use the Italian term ‘pelle’ — Products in free circulation)
Date: 2015-07-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: approximation of laws, footwear industry, free circulation, free movement of goods, labelling, marketing standard, measure having equivalent effect, quantitative restriction








C_2015302EN.01000601.xml










14.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/6





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano (Italy)) — Unione Nazionale Industria Conciaria (UNIC), Unione Nazionale dei Consumatori di Prodotti in Pelle, Materie Concianti, Accessori e Componenti (Unicopel) v FS Retail, Luna srl, Gatsby srl
(Case C-95/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Free movement of goods - Articles 34, 35 and 36 TFEU - Measures having equivalent effect - Directive 94/11/EC - Articles 3 and 5 - Exhaustive harmonisation - Bar on impeding the placing on the market of footwear which complies with the labelling requirements of Directive 94/11 - National legislation requiring the country of origin to be shown on the labelling of products manufactured abroad which use the Italian term ‘pelle’ - Products in free circulation))
(2015/C 302/07)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Unione Nazionale Industria Conciaria (UNIC), Unione Nazionale dei Consumatori di Prodotti in Pelle, Materie Concianti, Accessori e Componenti (Unicopel)

Defendants: FS Retail, Luna srl, Gatsby srl

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 3 and 5 of Directive 94/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 March 1994 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to labelling of the materials used in the main components of footwear for sale to the consumer must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, prohibiting, inter alia, the marketing of leather components of footwear coming from other Member States, or coming from non-member countries and already marketed in another Member State or in the Member State concerned, when those products do not bear a label indicating their country of origin.


(1)  OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.