do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-471/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S v Skatteministeriet
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, motor vehicle industry, spare part, used goods, vehicle parts








C_2015363EN.01002502.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/25





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S v Skatteministeriet
(Case C-471/15)
(2015/C 363/32)
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Sjelle Autogenbrug I/S

Defendant: Skatteministeriet

Question referred

In the circumstances of the present case, can parts from end-of-life vehicles which a VAT-registered vehicle reuse undertaking removes from a vehicle with a view to resale as spare parts be regarded as second-hand goods as referred to in Article 311(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (VAT Directive)?


(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union








C_2015294EN.01000101.xml










7.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 294/1







Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2015/C 294/01)


Last publication


OJ C 279, 24.8.2015


Past publications


OJ C 270, 17.8.2015


OJ C 262, 10.8.2015


OJ C 254, 3.8.2015


OJ C 245, 27.7.2015


OJ C 236, 20.7.2015


OJ C 228, 13.7.2015

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Case F-9/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 7 September 2015 — Verhelst v EMA
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, damages, indemnification, job cuts








C_2015346EN.01003802.xml










19.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 346/38





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 7 September 2015 — Verhelst v EMA
(Case F-9/15) (1)

(2015/C 346/43)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 118, 13.4.2015, p. 46.
Case C-476/15 P: Appeal brought on 7 September 2015 by Grupo Bimbo, S.A.B de C.V., against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 29 June 2015 in Case T-618/14 Grupo Bimbo v OHIM
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016165EN.01000401.xml










10.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/4





Appeal brought on 7 September 2015 by Grupo Bimbo, S.A.B de C.V., against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 29 June 2015 in Case T-618/14 Grupo Bimbo v OHIM

(Case C-476/15 P)
(2016/C 165/04)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Grupo Bimbo, S.A.B. de C.V. (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, abogado)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
By order of 15 March 2016, the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered Grupo Bimbo S.A.B. de C.V., to bear its own costs.
Case C-470/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Lufthansa Cargo AG; other party: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: United States, agreement (EU), air law, air traffic, aircraft fleet, carrier, load, right of establishment, third country








C_2015398EN.01001702.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/17





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Lufthansa Cargo AG; other party: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu
(Case C-470/15)
(2015/C 398/22)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Lufthansa Cargo AG

Other party: Staatssecretaris van Infrastructuur en Milieu

Questions referred







1.


Should the first sentence of Article 3(1)(c)(ii) of the Air Transport Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the United States of America, on the other hand (OJ 2007 L 134) be interpreted as meaning that it provides an effective right for a Community airline from Member State A to unload cargo, which was loaded in a third country, in another Member State B, following a stopover in the US during which that cargo is not unloaded, and that it is to that extent not necessary to rely on bilateral agreements between Member State B and a third country?










2.


Can a Community airline derive rights from the Air Transport Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, on the one hand, and the United States of America, on the other hand, in relation to Member States other than the Member State in which that airline has its principal place of establishment?










3.


Does Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 847/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the negotiation and implementation of air service agreements between Member States and third countries (OJ 2004 L 195; corrigendum in OJ 2007 L 204) preclude a requirement being laid down, in the assessment as to whether the criterion of establishment referred to in Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and defined in detail in the case-law of the Court of Justice has been satisfied, that, inter alia, a Community airline having its principal place of establishment in Member State A must have part of its fleet, comprising at least two aircraft, stationed in Member State B?
Case T-510/15: Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Mengozzi v OHIM — Consorzio per la Tutela dell’Olio Extravergine di Oliva Toscano (TOSCORO)
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, TRIPS, condiment, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable oil








C_2015354EN.01004601.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/46





Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Mengozzi v OHIM — Consorzio per la Tutela dell’Olio Extravergine di Oliva Toscano (TOSCORO)
(Case T-510/15)
(2015/C 354/56)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Roberto Mengozzi (Monaco, Monaco) (represented by: T. Schuffenecker, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Consorzio per la Tutela dell’Olio Extravergine di Oliva Toscano IGP (Florence, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘TOSCORO’/Community trade mark No 2 752 509

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 June 2015 in Case R 322/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


partly uphold the contested decision and annul that part of the decision which invalidated the CTM registration for the goods ‘Edible oils fats; edible vegetable oils, notably olive oils’ as well as ‘green and black olive creams’;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred by the Applicant before the Board of Appeal;










—


order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred by the applicant before the Board of Appeal, should it become an intervening party in this case.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(k) of Regulation No 207/2009 and of Article 6(1) of Regulation EU No. 1151/2012;










—


Infringement of Article 13(1)(b) of Regulation No. 1151/2012;










—


Infringement of Article 15 of TRIPS Agreement.
Case C-479/15 P: Appeal brought on 7 September 2015 by Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp GmbH & Co. KG against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 9 July 2015 in Case T-89/11: Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp v EUIPO
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, gift item, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_2016270EN.01001403.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/14





Appeal brought on 7 September 2015 by Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp GmbH & Co. KG against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 9 July 2015 in Case T-89/11: Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp v EUIPO
(Case C-479/15 P)
(2016/C 270/20)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Nanu-Nana Joachim Hoepp GmbH & Co. KG (represented by: A. Nordemann, Rechtsanwalt, M.C. Maier, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
By order of 14 April 2016 the Court (Sixth Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.
Case T-517/15: Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Sales)
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consumer behaviour, management training, registered trade mark, sales promotion, theory of marketing, trade-mark law, traineeship








C_2015354EN.01004901.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/49





Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Sales)
(Case T-517/15)
(2015/C 354/60)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult AG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze und G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

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

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Limbic® Sales’ — Application for registration No 12 316 493

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 June 2015 in Case R 1972/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision concerning the application for registration of the Community trade mark 012 316 493 Limbic® Sales;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 63, the first sentence of Article 75 and of Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-516/15: Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Types)
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consumer behaviour, personality, psychoanalysis, registered trade mark, theory of marketing, trade-mark law








C_2015354EN.01004802.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/48





Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Types)
(Case T-516/15)
(2015/C 354/59)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult AG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze und G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

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

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Limbic® Types’ — Application for registration No 12 316 469

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 June 2015 in Case R 1974/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision concerning the application for registration of the Community trade mark 012 316 469 Limbic® Types;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 63, the first sentence of Article 75 and of Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-473/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bezirksgericht Linz (Austria) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Peter Schotthöfer & Florian Steiner GbR v Eugen Adelsmayr
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: area of freedom, security and justice, criminal proceedings, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, extradition, foreign national, public international law, right to justice, third country








C_2015406EN.01001501.xml










7.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 406/15






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bezirksgericht Linz (Austria) lodged on 7 September 2015 — Peter Schotthöfer & Florian Steiner GbR v Eugen Adelsmayr
(Case C-473/15)
(2015/C 406/16)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bezirksgericht Linz

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Peter Schotthöfer & Florian Steiner GbR

Defendant: Eugen Adelsmayr

Question referred









1.


Is the principle of non-discrimination laid down in Article 18 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member State has laid down a provision in its legal system, such as Article 16(2) of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, which prohibits the extradition of German citizens to non-Member States, the prohibition also applies to citizens of other Member States residing in the Member State at issue?












2.


Are Articles 19(2) and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that a Member State of the European Union must reject an application for extradition emanating from a non-Member State concerning an EU citizen residing in that Member State where the criminal proceedings from which the application for extradition arose and the decision rendered in absentia in the non-Member State did not respect the minimum standard of international law and the non-mandatory principles of the public order of the European Union (ordre public) or the right to a fair trial?












3.


Lastly, is Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union or the principle of ne bis in idem secured in the case-law of the Court of Justice to be interpreted as precluding further prosecution by a non-Member State in the case of a first conviction in the non-Member State followed by the discontinuing of proceedings in a Member State of the European Union for lack of real grounds justifying prosecution?












4.


In the event that one of the first three questions is answered in the affirmative, is, inter alia, Article 6 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Right to liberty’) to be interpreted as meaning that an EU citizen may not be held in custody for extradition where a non-Member State makes such an application for extradition?
Case T-513/15: Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Map)
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consumer motivation, marketing, personality, psychoanalysis, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015354EN.01004801.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/48





Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Map)
(Case T-513/15)
(2015/C 354/58)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult AG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze und G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

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

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Limbic® Map’ — Application for registration No 12 316 411

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 June 2015 in Case R 1973/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision concerning the application for registration of the Community trade mark 012 316 411 Limbic® Map;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 63, the first sentence of Article 75 and of Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-521/15: Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Diesel v OHIM — Sprinter megacentros del deporte (curved and angled line)
Date: 2015-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2015381EN.01004801.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/48





Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Diesel v OHIM — Sprinter megacentros del deporte (curved and angled line)
(Case T-521/15)
(2015/C 381/58)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Diesel SpA (Breganze, Italy) (represented by: A. Gaul, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sprinter megacentros del deporte, SL (Elche, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Figurative mark (Representation of a curved or angled line) — Application for registration No 11 404 019

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 June 2015 in Case R 3291/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009.