do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-363/14: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2015 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union (Actions for annulment — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Europol — List of third States and organisations with which Europol is to conclude agreements — Determination of the legal basis — Legal framework applicable after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon — Transitional provisions — Secondary legal basis — Distinction between legislative acts and implementing measures — Consultation of the Parliament — Initiative of a Member State or the Commission)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU act, Europol, Treaty of Lisbon, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, legal basis, third country








C_2015363EN.01001602.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/16





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 September 2015 — European Parliament v Council of the European Union
(Case C-363/14) (1)

((Actions for annulment - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Europol - List of third States and organisations with which Europol is to conclude agreements - Determination of the legal basis - Legal framework applicable after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon - Transitional provisions - Secondary legal basis - Distinction between legislative acts and implementing measures - Consultation of the Parliament - Initiative of a Member State or the Commission))
(2015/C 363/19)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: F. Drexler, A. Caiola and M. Pencheva, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Sitbon, K. Pleśniak and K. Michoel, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil and J. Škeřík, acting as Agents), Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér, G. Szima and M. Bóra, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders the European Parliament to pay the costs;










3)


Orders the Czech Republic and Hungary to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 22.9.2014.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015298EN.01000101.xml










10.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

9 September 2015
(2015/C 298/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1139




JPY


Japanese yen


134,65




DKK


Danish krone


7,4611




GBP


Pound sterling


0,72510




SEK


Swedish krona


9,4024




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0893




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,2000




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,057




HUF


Hungarian forint


313,17




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2067




RON


Romanian leu


4,4174




TRY


Turkish lira


3,3633




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5860




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4757




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6334




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7461




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5782




KRW


South Korean won


1 325,47




ZAR


South African rand


15,2276




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1047




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5510




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 869,33




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8043




PHP


Philippine peso


52,258




RUB


Russian rouble


75,7811




THB


Thai baht


40,193




BRL


Brazilian real


4,2340




MXN


Mexican peso


18,6895




INR


Indian rupee


73,9755






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-151/14: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 September 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Latvia (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 49 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Notaries — Nationality requirement — Article 51 TFEU — Connection with the exercise of official authority)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: discrimination on the basis of nationality, infringement of EU law, nationality, notary, right of establishment








C_2015363EN.01001301.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/13





Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 September 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Latvia
(Case C-151/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Notaries - Nationality requirement - Article 51 TFEU - Connection with the exercise of official authority))
(2015/C 363/15)
Language of the case: Latvian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: I. Rubene and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Latvia (represented by: D. Pelše, I. Kalniņš and K. Freimanis, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents), Hungary (represented by: M. Tátrai and M. Fehér, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by imposing a nationality requirement for access to the profession of notary, the Republic of Latvia failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU;










2.


Orders the Republic of Latvia to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the Czech Republic to bear its own costs;










4.


Orders Hungary to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.
Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Finland, air transport, invitation to tender, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2015298EN.01000201.xml










10.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 298/2





Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 298/02)






Member State


Finland




Route concerned


Mariehamn (MHQ) — Stockholm Arlanda (ARN)




Period of validity of the contract


1.3.2016-29.2.2020




Deadline for submission of applications and tenders


63rd calendar day after publishing




Address from which the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained







ÅLANDS LANDSKAPSREGERING




The Government of Åland




PB 1060




AX-22111 MARIEHAMN




Åland, Finland




E-mail: registrator@regeringen.ax




Internet: www.regeringen.ax/upphandlingar
Case T-143/14: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a yellow background) (Community trade mark — Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a yellow background — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2015354EN.01003202.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/32





Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a yellow background)
(Case T-143/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a yellow background - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 354/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 November 2013 (Case R 703/2013-2) relating to an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing white dots on a yellow background.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders EE Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
Case T-453/14: Order of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — Pannonhalmi Főapátság v Parliament (Action for annulment — Petition addressed to the Parliament concerning ownership of Lónyay castle in Rusovce (Slovak Republic) — Petition declared inadmissible — Obligation to state reasons — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EP Committee, EU activity, petition








C_2015381EN.01002801.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/28





Order of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — Pannonhalmi Főapátság v Parliament
(Case T-453/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Petition addressed to the Parliament concerning ownership of Lónyay castle in Rusovce (Slovak Republic) - Petition declared inadmissible - Obligation to state reasons - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2015/C 381/30)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság (Pannonhalma, Hungary) (represented by: D. Sobor, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: A. Pospíšilová Padowska and T. Lukácsi, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the Petitions Committee of the European Parliament of 16 April 2014 whereby that Committee declared the petition presented by the applicant on 26 June 2013 inadmissible on the ground that it did not fall within the sphere of activity of the European Union.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság shall pay the costs.










3.


There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene by the Slovak Republic and by Hungary.






(1)  OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.
Case C-480/15 P: Appeal brought on 10 September 2015 by KS Sports IPCo GmbH, successor in law to BH Stores BV against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 2 July 2015 in Case T-657/13: KS Sports v EUIPO
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2016270EN.01001501.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/15





Appeal brought on 10 September 2015 by KS Sports IPCo GmbH, successor in law to BH Stores BV against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 2 July 2015 in Case T-657/13: KS Sports v EUIPO
(Case C-480/15 P)
(2016/C 270/21)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: KS Sports IPCo GmbH, successor in law to BH Stores BV (represented by: T. Dolde, Rechtsanwalt, M. Hawkins, Solicitor, P. Homann, 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 C-569/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 September 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö — Sweden) — Bricmate AB v Tullverket (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Commercial policy — Anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 — Validity — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Articles 3(2), 3(3), 3(5), 3(6), 17 and 20(1) — Determination of the injury and of the causal link — Errors of fact and manifest errors of assessment — Obligation to exercise due care — Examination of the evidence sent by a sampled importer — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, floor coverings, import (EU), originating product, rights of the defence








C_2015363EN.01000501.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/5





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 September 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö — Sweden) — Bricmate AB v Tullverket
(Case C-569/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Commercial policy - Anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in China - Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 - Validity - Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Articles 3(2), 3(3), 3(5), 3(6), 17 and 20(1) - Determination of the injury and of the causal link - Errors of fact and manifest errors of assessment - Obligation to exercise due care - Examination of the evidence sent by a sampled importer - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence))
(2015/C 363/05)
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bricmate AB

Defendant: Tullverket

Operative part of the judgment

Consideration of the question referred for a preliminary ruling has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 of 12 September 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People’s Republic of China.


(1)  OJ C 15, 18.1.2014.
Case C-36/14: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 September 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Poland (Failure of a Member State to fulfill obligations — Internal market in natural gas — Directive 2009/73/EC — State intervention consisting of the obligation to apply prices for supplies of national gas approved by a national authority — Measure unlimited in time — No obligation to check at regular intervals the necessity of that measure and the nature of its application — Application to an unlimited set of users, without distinction between customers or between specific situations — Proportionality)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: assessment of prices, energy industry, gas supply, infringement of EU law, intervention policy, natural gas, price regulations, principle of proportionality, single market








C_2015363EN.01000701.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/7





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 September 2015 — European Commission v Republic of Poland
(Case C-36/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfill obligations - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - State intervention consisting of the obligation to apply prices for supplies of national gas approved by a national authority - Measure unlimited in time - No obligation to check at regular intervals the necessity of that measure and the nature of its application - Application to an unlimited set of users, without distinction between customers or between specific situations - Proportionality))
(2015/C 363/08)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and M. Patakia, 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 scheme of State intervention, consisting of the obligation, for energy undertakings, to apply prices for supplies of natural gas which have been approved by the president of the Urzad Regulacji Energetyki (Energy Regulation Authority), an obligation which is unlimited in time and for which national law does not impose on the administrative authorities any obligation to check at regular intervals the necessity and nature of the application of that intervention in the gas sector, having regard to the level of development of that sector, and which is characterised by its application to an unlimited group of users or customers, without any distinction being drawn according to customers and without any differentiation of the situation of individuals within the context of individual groups of customers, the Republic of Poland has failed to comply with its obligations under the provisions of Article 3(1) in conjunction with Article 3(2) of Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC;










2.


orders the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 85, 22.3.2014.
Case T-77/14: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a grey background) (Community trade mark — Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a grey background — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2015354EN.01003002.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/30





Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a grey background)
(Case T-77/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a grey background - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 354/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 October 2013 (Case R 704/2013-1) relating to an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing white dots on a grey background.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders EE Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
Case T-568/14: Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — Laverana v OHIM (BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION) (Community trade mark — Application for Community figurative mark BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015354EN.01003401.xml










26.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 354/34





Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — Laverana v OHIM (BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION)
(Case T-568/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community figurative mark BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 354/39)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Laverana GmbH & Co. KG (Wennigsen, Germany) (represented by: J. Wachinger, M. Zöbisch and D. Chatterjee, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 May 2014 (Case R 120/2014-4) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Laverana GmbH & Co. KG to bear the costs.






(1)  OJ C 361, 13.10.2014.
Case C-408/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 September 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Aliny Wojciechowski v Office national des pensions (ONP) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Retired EU official who has, prior to entering the service, pursued an activity in an employed capacity in the Member State in which she is posted — Pension rights by virtue of the national pension scheme for employed persons — Occupational record unit — Refusal to pay the retirement pension for employed persons — Principle of sincere cooperation)
Date: 2015-09-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European official, civil servant, pension scheme, retired person, retirement conditions








C_2015363EN.01001701.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/17





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 September 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail de Bruxelles — Belgium) — Aliny Wojciechowski v Office national des pensions (ONP)
(Case C-408/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Retired EU official who has, prior to entering the service, pursued an activity in an employed capacity in the Member State in which she is posted - Pension rights by virtue of the national pension scheme for employed persons - Occupational record unit - Refusal to pay the retirement pension for employed persons - Principle of sincere cooperation))
(2015/C 363/20)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Aliny Wojciechowski

Defendant: Office national des pensions (ONP)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(3) TEU, in conjunction with the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, established by Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 of the Council of 29 February 1968 laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Communities and instituting special measures temporarily applicable to officials of the Commission, as amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1080/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010, must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which may give rise to the reduction or refusal of a retirement pension payable to an employed person who is a national of that Member State by virtue of the service performed, in accordance with its legislation, where the total number of years of the occupational record acquired by him as an employed person in that Member State and as an EU official posted in that Member State exceeds the ‘occupational record unit’ of 45 years referred to in that legislation, in so far as, owing to the method used to calculate the fraction representing the size of the pension payable by the European Union, that reduction is greater than it would have been had he acquired the whole of his occupational record as an employed person in the Member State in question.


(1)  OJ C 421, 24.11.2014.