do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-400/13: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — L’Oréal v OHIM — Cosmetica Cabinas (AINHOA) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark AINHOA — Earlier Community and international figurative marks NOA — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015389EN.01003401.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/34





Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — L’Oréal v OHIM — Cosmetica Cabinas (AINHOA)
(Case T-400/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark AINHOA - Earlier Community and international figurative marks NOA - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 389/35)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: L'Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: H. Granado Carpenter and M.L. Polo Carreño, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño and A. Schifko, agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Cosmetica Cabinas SL (El Masnou, Spain) (represented by: L. Montoya Terán and J.-B. Devaureix, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 June 2013 (Case R 1643/2012-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between L’Oréal and Cosmetica Cabinas SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders L’Oréal to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 298, 12.10.2013.
Case T-555/14: Order of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Estonia v Commission (Fisheries — Investment for fishing vessels carried out by Estonia — Decision to suspend the interim payments — Withdrawal of the decision — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European fisheries fund, fishing vessel, infringement of EU law, investment aid, operational programme, principle of legal certainty, suspension of payments








C_2015381EN.01002902.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/29





Order of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Estonia v Commission
(Case T-555/14) (1)

((Fisheries - Investment for fishing vessels carried out by Estonia - Decision to suspend the interim payments - Withdrawal of the decision - No need to adjudicate))
(2015/C 381/32)
Language of the case: Estonian

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Estonia (represented by: N. Grünberg and K. Kraavi Käerdi, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Randvere and K. Walkerová, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C (2014) 3271 final of 14 May 2014 on the suspension of interim payments in favour of Estonia for the period 2007/2013 within the framework of the operational programme of support for Estonia from the European Fisheries Fund.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Commission is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 372, 20.10.2014.
Judgment of the Court of 23 September 2015 in Case E-23/14 — Kimek Offshore AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority (Action for annulment — State aid — Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure — Admissibility — Legal interest — Status as interested party — Doubts or serious difficulties — General measures — Aid scheme)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: EFTA, Norway, national implementing measure, regional aid, regional disparity, social-security contribution








C_2016422EN.01000601.xml










17.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/6





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 23 September 2015
in Case E-23/14
Kimek Offshore AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority
(Action for annulment — State aid — Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure — Admissibility — Legal interest — Status as interested party — Doubts or serious difficulties — General measures — Aid scheme)
(2016/C 422/05)
In Case E-23/14, Kimek Offshore AS v EFTA Surveillance Authority — APPLICATION for the annulment of EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 225/14/COL of 18 June 2014 on the compatibility of Norway’s regionally differentiated social security contributions scheme with the Agreement on the European Economic Area, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur) Judges, gave judgment on 23 September 2015, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Annuls ESA Decision No 225/14/COL of 18 June 2014 on the compatibility of Norway’s regionally differentiated social security contributions scheme with the Agreement on the European Economic Area, in so far as it closed the preliminary investigation as regards section 1(4) of the Norwegian Parliament’s Decision No 1482 of 5 December 2013 on determination of the tax rates etc. under the National Insurance Act for 2014.










2.


Orders ESA to bear its own costs and the costs incurred by the applicant.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7769 — Gilde Fund IV/Parcom Fund IV/Koninklijke Ten Cate) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, textile industry








C_2015314EN.01001201.xml










23.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/12





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7769 — Gilde Fund IV/Parcom Fund IV/Koninklijke Ten Cate)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 314/07)






1.


On 14 September 2015, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Gilde Buy-Out Fund IV CV and Gilde Buy Out-Fund IV Coöperatief UA (Netherlands, jointly ‘Gilde Fund IV’) and Parcom Buy-Out Fund IV BV (Netherlands, ‘Parcom Fund IV’), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Koninklike Ten Cate NV (Netherlands) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Gilde Fund IV: independent investment in mid-market companies with a portfolio spanning in a number of industries and covering mainly the Benelux, Germany, Switzerland and Austria;
—   for Parcom Fund IV: private equity investment mainly in medium-sized companies in the Benelux;
—   for Koninklijke Ten Cate NV: supplier of semi-manufactures and components in the field of advanced textiles and composites, geosynthethics and grass.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in this Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7769 — Gilde Fund IV/Parcom Fund IV/Koninklijke Ten Cate, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Corrigendum to Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer information, credit guarantee, financial solvency, foreign currency, mortgage, real estate credit, real property, residence








L_2015246EN.01001101.xml










23.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 246/11







Corrigendum to Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 60 of 28 February 2014
)


On page 38, recital 26:
for:

               ‘… internationally recognised valuation standards, in particular those developed by the International Valuation Standards Committee, the European Group of Valuers' Associations or …’,
read:

               ‘… internationally recognised valuation standards, in particular those developed by the International Valuation Standards Council, the European Group of Valuers' Associations or …’;
on page 80, Annex II, Part B, Section ‘4. Interest rate’ and other costs, point (2), second last sentence:
for:

               ‘The warning shall be accompanied by an additional, illustrative APRC calculated in accordance with Article 17(4).’,
read:

               ‘…The warning shall be accompanied by an additional, illustrative APRC calculated in accordance with Article 17(5).’.
Case C-504/15: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Frosinone (Italy) lodged on 23 September 2015 — Criminal proceedings against Antonio Paolo Conti
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: freedom to provide services, gaming, right of establishment, trade licence, transfer of businesses








C_2015406EN.01002002.xml










7.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 406/20






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Frosinone (Italy) lodged on 23 September 2015 — Criminal proceedings against Antonio Paolo Conti
(Case C-504/15)
(2015/C 406/21)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Frosinone

Party/parties to the main proceedings

Antonio Paolo Conti

Question referred

Are Article 49 et seq. and Article 56 et seq. of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as also expanded upon by the principles laid down in the judgment of the Court of Justice of 16 February 2012 [in Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10] to be interpreted as precluding national legislation which imposes an obligation to transfer, free of charge, the right to use the tangible and intangible assets constituting the network for managing and collecting bets upon cessation of that activity due to the expiry of the relevant licence or as a result of measures disqualifying the licence-holder or withdrawing the licence?
Case T-60/13: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Appelrath-Cüpper v OHIM — Ann Christine Lizenzmanagement (AC) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for figurative Community trade mark AC — Earlier figurative national and international trade marks AC ANN CHRISTINE and earlier figurative Community trade marks AC ANN CHRISTINE OCEAN and AC ANN CHRISTINE INTIMATE — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015389EN.01002702.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/27





Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Appelrath-Cüpper v OHIM — Ann Christine Lizenzmanagement (AC)
(Case T-60/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative Community trade mark AC - Earlier figurative national and international trade marks AC ANN CHRISTINE and earlier figurative Community trade marks AC ANN CHRISTINE OCEAN and AC ANN CHRISTINE INTIMATE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 389/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Reiner Appelrath-Cüpper Nachf. GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: C. Schumann and A. Berger, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Ann Christine Lizenzmanagement GmbH & Co. KG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: M. Hartmann, N. Voß and S. Fröhlich, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2012 (Case R 108/2012-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Ann Christine Lizenzmanagement GmbH & Co. KG and Reiner Appelrath-Cüpper Nachf. GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders that the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 28 November 2012 (Case R 108/2012-4) is annulled in so far as it upheld in part the opposition brought by Ann Christine Lizenzmanagement GmbH & Co. KG;










2.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay half the costs incurred by Reiner Appelrath-Cüpper Nachf. GmbH;










3.


Orders Ann Christine Lizenzmanagement GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs and to pay half the costs incurred by Reiner Appelrath-Cüpper Nachf. GmbH for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.






(1)  OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
Notice to importers — Imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres into the European Union from GSP beneficiary countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I and group III
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Singapore, customs debt, customs fraud, free circulation, generalised preferences, glass fibre, import (EU), least-developed country, metal product, originating product








C_2015314EN.01001101.xml










23.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/11





NOTICE TO IMPORTERS
Imports of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres into the European Union from GSP beneficiary countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I and group III
(2015/C 314/06)
The European Commission informs European Union operators that there are reasonable doubts concerning the proper application of the preferential treatment and the applicability of proofs of origin presented in the Union for open mesh fabrics of glass fibres of HS subheadings 7019 40, 7019 51 and 7019 59 imported from GSP beneficiary countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I and group III (1).
Following a number of investigations, it would appear that significant quantities of open mesh fabrics of glass fibres of HS subheadings 7019 40, 7019 51 and 7019 59, consigned to the EU generally from Singapore, are being declared for release for free circulation in the Union as having the preferential origin of one of the countries belonging to the regional cumulation group I or III, without being entitled to it.
European Union operators declaring origin and/or presenting proofs of origin for the products mentioned above are therefore advised to take all necessary precautions as the release of the goods in question for free circulation may give rise to a customs debt, lead to fraud and, consequently, negatively affect the European Union’s financial interests. When the possible subsequent entry in the accounts of a customs debt results from the abovementioned circumstances the person liable may not plead good faith in accordance with the fifth subparagraph of Article 220(2)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (2).


(1)  The list of countries is set out in Article 86 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementing of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code. At the time of the publication of this notice, the following beneficiary countries belong to the groups:






—


Group I – Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Philippines, Vietnam, Myanmar/Burma










—


Group III – Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka





(2)  OJ L 302, 19.10. 1992, p. 1.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1716 of 23 September 2015 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Olive de Nice (PDO))
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, designation of origin, labelling, olive, product designation








L_2015251EN.01000901.xml










26.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 251/9








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/1716
of 23 September 2015
         
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Olive de Nice (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined France's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Olive de Nice’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 885/2005 (2).












(2)


Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.












(3)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Olive de Nice’ (PDO) are hereby approved.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 September 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Phil HOGAN
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 885/2005 of 10 June 2005 supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 as regards the entry of a name in the ‘Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications’ (Olive de Nice) — (PDO) (OJ L 148, 11.6.2005, p. 30).

(3)  
            OJ C 150, 7.5.2015, p. 15.
Case T-633/13: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Reed Exhibitions v OHIM (INFOSECURITY) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark INFOSECURITY — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — No distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade event, trade-mark law








C_2015389EN.01004101.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/41





Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Reed Exhibitions v OHIM (INFOSECURITY)
(Case T-633/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark INFOSECURITY - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))
(2015/C 389/43)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Reed Exhibitions Ltd (Richmond, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 September 2013 (Case R 1544/2012-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign INFOSECURITY as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Reed Exhibitions Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.
Case T-588/14: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Mechadyne International v OHIM (FlexValve) (Community trade mark — Application for a Community figurative mark FlexValve — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Rights of the defence — Duty to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, engine, piping, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vehicle parts








C_2015389EN.01005201.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/52





Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2015 — Mechadyne International v OHIM (FlexValve)
(Case T-588/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark FlexValve - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rights of the defence - Duty to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2015/C 389/58)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Mechadyne International Ltd (Kirtlington, United Kingdom) (represented by S. von Petersdorff-Campen and E. Schaper, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by A. Pohlmann, then S. Hanne, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 June 2014 (Case R 2435/2013-4), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign FlexValve as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Mechadyne International Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 361, 13.10.2014.