do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-66/14: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Finanzamt Linz v Bundesfinanzgericht, Außenstelle Linz (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 49 TFEU, 54 TFEU, 107 TFEU and 108(3) TFEU — Freedom of establishment — State aid — Taxation of groups of companies — Acquisition of a holding in a subsidiary — Depreciation of the goodwill — Limitation on holdings in resident companies)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, amortisation, basis of tax assessment, goodwill, parent company, right of establishment, subsidiary








C_2015398EN.01000302.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/3





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — Finanzamt Linz v Bundesfinanzgericht, Außenstelle Linz
(Case C-66/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 TFEU, 54 TFEU, 107 TFEU and 108(3) TFEU - Freedom of establishment - State aid - Taxation of groups of companies - Acquisition of a holding in a subsidiary - Depreciation of the goodwill - Limitation on holdings in resident companies))
(2015/C 398/04)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Finanzamt Linz

Defendant: Bundesfinanzgericht, Außenstelle Linz

Parties concerned: IFN-Holding AG, IFN Beteiligungs GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU precludes legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, in the context of the taxation of a group of companies, allows a parent company, in the case of the acquisition of a holding in a resident company which becomes a member of such a group, to depreciate the goodwill up to a maximum of 50 % of the purchase price of the holding, while such depreciation is prohibited in the case of the acquisition of a holding in a non-resident company.


(1)  OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
Case C-346/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons — Belgium) — Ville de Mons v Base Company SA, formerly KPN Group Belgium SA (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Electronic communications networks and services — Directive 2002/20/EC — Article 13 — Fee for rights to install facilities — Scope — Municipal regulations making owners of mobile telephone transmission pylons and masts subject to payment of a tax)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: local tax, regulation of telecommunications, telecommunications equipment, transmission network








C_2015398EN.01000201.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/2





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons — Belgium) — Ville de Mons v Base Company SA, formerly KPN Group Belgium SA
(Case C-346/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications networks and services - Directive 2002/20/EC - Article 13 - Fee for rights to install facilities - Scope - Municipal regulations making owners of mobile telephone transmission pylons and masts subject to payment of a tax))
(2015/C 398/02)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Ville de Mons

Defendant: Base Company SA, formerly KPN Group Belgium SA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13 of Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) must be interpreted as not precluding a tax, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, being imposed on the owner of free-standing structures, such as transmission pylons or masts intended to support the antennas required for the functioning of the mobile telecommunication network, and which it was not possible to place on an existing site.


(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1864 of 6 October 2015 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Παφίτικο Λουκάνικο (Pafitiko Loukaniko) (PGI))
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cyprus, designation of origin, foodstuff, labelling, meat product, product designation








L_2015275EN.01000101.xml










20.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 275/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/1864
of 6 October 2015
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Παφίτικο Λουκάνικο (Pafitiko Loukaniko) (PGI))


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 Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Cyprus's application to register the name ‘Παφίτικο Λουκάνικο’ (Pafitiko Loukaniko) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Παφίτικο Λουκάνικο’ (Pafitiko Loukaniko) should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Παφίτικο Λουκάνικο’ (Pafitiko Loukaniko) (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.2. — Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


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, 6 October 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)  
            OJ C 189, 6.6.2015, p. 14.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).
Case T-580/15: Action brought on 6 October 2015 — Flamagas v OHIM — MatMind (CLIPPER)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2016038EN.01006201.xml










1.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/62





Action brought on 6 October 2015 — Flamagas v OHIM — MatMind (CLIPPER)
(Case T-580/15)
(2016/C 038/84)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Flamagas, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, G. Hinarejos Mulliez and D. Gabarre Armengol, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: MatMind Srl (Formello, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community tridimensional mark (Shape of lighter containing the word element ‘CLIPPER’) — Community trade mark No 4 758 652

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 July 2015 in Case R 924/2013-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


confirm the decision of 22/03/2013 of the Cancellation Division in Cancellation Proceedings No. C 5642 against Community trademark registration No. 4 758 652;










—


order the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


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










—


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










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of Regulation No 207/2009.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting 4-methyl-5-(4-methylphenyl)- 4,5-dihydrooxazol-2-amine (4,4'-DMAR) and 1-cyclohexyl-4-(1,2-diphenylethyl)piperazine (MT-45) to control measures (10009/2015 — C8-0183/2015 — 2014/0340(NLE))
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, European Parliament
Subjects: EU control, drug addiction, drug traffic, health control, health risk, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, psychotropic substance, toxicology








C_2017349EN.01008701.xml










17.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/87





P8_TA(2015)0329
Subjecting 4,4'-DMAR and MT-45 to control measures *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting 4-methyl-5-(4-methylphenyl)- 4,5-dihydrooxazol-2-amine (4,4'-DMAR) and 1-cyclohexyl-4-(1,2-diphenylethyl)piperazine (MT-45) to control measures (10009/2015 — C8-0183/2015 — 2014/0340(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2017/C 349/18)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Council draft (10009/2015),










—


having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on Transitional Provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0183/2015),










—


having regard to Council Decision 2005/387/JHA of 10 May 2005 on the information exchange, risk-assessment and control of new psychoactive substances (1), and in particular Article 8(3) thereof,










—


having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0262/2015),












1.


Approves the Council draft;












2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;












4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.






(1)  OJ L 127, 20.5.2005, p. 32.
Case C-519/14 P: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 6 October 2015 — Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. v European Commission, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Agriculture — Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 — Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications — Registration of the designation ‘Gouda Holland’ — Producers using the name ‘Gouda’ — Absence of a legal interest in bringing proceedings)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Netherlands, consumer information, designation of origin, labelling, product designation, semi-soft cheese








C_2016038EN.01001501.xml










1.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/15





Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 6 October 2015 — Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. v European Commission, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie
(Case C-519/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Agriculture - Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 - Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications - Registration of the designation ‘Gouda Holland’ - Producers using the name ‘Gouda’ - Absence of a legal interest in bringing proceedings))
(2016/C 038/20)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. (represented by: M. Loschelder and V. Schoene, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: B. Schima, J. Guillem Carrau and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman and B. Koopman, acting as Agents), Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie (represented by: P. van Ginneken and G. Béquet, advocaten)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Schutzgemeinschaft Milch und Milcherzeugnisse e.V. shall pay the costs.










3.


The Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Nederlandse Zuivelorganisatie shall bear their own respective costs.






(1)  OJ C 16, 19.1.2015.
Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/1793 of 6 October 2015 amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU military mission, Horn of Africa, defence expenditure, maritime safety, piracy




L_2015260EN.01003001.xml










7.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 260/30








            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2015/1793
of 6 October 2015
         
amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR)


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union and in particular Article 28, Article 42(4) and Article 43(2) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 16 July 2012, the Council adopted Decision 2012/389/CFSP (1).












(2)


On 22 July 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/485/CFSP (2) amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP and extending the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) until 12 December 2016.












(3)


Decision 2012/389/CFSP should be amended to extend the period covered by the financial reference amount until 15 December 2015,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 13(1) and (2) of Decision 2012/389/CFSP are replaced as follows:

‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP NESTOR from 16 July 2012 to 15 November 2013 shall be EUR 22 880 000.
The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP NESTOR for the period from 16 November 2013 to 15 October 2014 shall be EUR 11 950 000.
The financial reference amount to cover the expenditure related to EUCAP NESTOR for the period from 16 October 2014 to 15 December 2015 shall be EUR 17 900 000.


2.   All expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the rules and procedures applicable to the general budget of the Union. Participation of natural and legal persons in the award of procurement contracts by EUCAP NESTOR shall be open without limitations. Moreover, no rule of origin for the goods purchased by EUCAP NESTOR shall apply.’.



Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Luxembourg, 6 October 2015.


For the Council


The President

P. GRAMEGNA
            





(1)  Council Decision 2012/389/CFSP of 16 July 2012 on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) (OJ L 187, 17.7.2012, p. 40).

(2)  Council Decision 2014/485/CFSP of 22 July 2014 amending Decision 2012/389/CFSP on the European Union Mission on Regional Maritime Capacity Building in the Horn of Africa (EUCAP NESTOR) (OJ L 217, 23.7.2014, p. 39).
Case C-23/14: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sø- og Handelsretten — Denmark) — Post Danmark A/S v Konkurrencerådet (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 82 EC — Abuse of a dominant position — Market for the distribution of bulk mail — Direct advertising mail — Retroactive rebate scheme — Exclusionary effect — ‘As-efficient-competitor’ test — Degree of likelihood and seriousness of an anti-competitive effect)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: control of restrictive practices, distribution business, dominant position, postal service, reduced price








C_2015389EN.01000401.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/4





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sø- og Handelsretten — Denmark) — Post Danmark A/S v Konkurrencerådet
(Case C-23/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 82 EC - Abuse of a dominant position - Market for the distribution of bulk mail - Direct advertising mail - Retroactive rebate scheme - Exclusionary effect - ‘As-efficient-competitor’ test - Degree of likelihood and seriousness of an anti-competitive effect))
(2015/C 389/04)
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Sø- og Handelsretten

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Post Danmark A/S

Defendant: Konkurrencerådet

Operative part of the judgment







1.


In order to determine whether a rebate scheme, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, implemented by a dominant undertaking is capable of having an exclusionary effect on the market contrary to Article 82 EC, it is necessary to examine all the circumstances of the case, in particular, the criteria and rules governing the grant of the rebates, the extent of the dominant position of the undertaking concerned and the particular conditions of competition prevailing on the relevant market. The fact that the rebate scheme covers the majority of customers on the market may constitute a useful indication as to the extent of that practice and its impact on the market, which may bear out the likelihood of an anti-competitive exclusionary effect.










2.


The application of the ‘as-efficient-competitor’ test does not constitute a necessary condition for a finding to the effect that a rebate scheme is abusive under Article 82 EC. In a situation such as that in the main proceedings, applying the as-efficient-competitor test is of no relevance.










3.


Article 82 EC must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to fall within the scope of that article, the anti-competitive effect of a rebate scheme operated by a dominant undertaking, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, must be probable, there being no need to show that it is of a serious or appreciable nature.






(1)  OJ C 78, 15.3.2014.
Case C-508/14: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Český telekomunikační úřad v T-Mobile Czech Republic a.s., Vodafone Czech Republic a.s. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive) — Costing of universal service obligations — Taking account of the rate of return on equity capital — Direct effect — Scope ratione temporis)
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: costing, direct applicability, postal and telecommunications services, profit, right of establishment, services of general interest, transmission network, universal service








C_2015389EN.01001102.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/11





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Český telekomunikační úřad v T-Mobile Czech Republic a.s., Vodafone Czech Republic a.s.
(Case C-508/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive) - Costing of universal service obligations - Taking account of the rate of return on equity capital - Direct effect - Scope ratione temporis))
(2015/C 389/13)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Český telekomunikační úřad

Defendants: T-Mobile Czech Republic a.s., Vodafone Czech Republic a.s.

Intervening parties: O2 Czech Republic a.s., formerly Telefónica Czech Republic a.s., UPC Česká republika s.r.o.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Articles 12 and 13 of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) must be interpreted as not precluding the net cost of the universal service obligation including the ‘reasonable profit’ of the provider of that service, fixed at the rate of return on equity capital that would be required by an undertaking comparable to the universal service provider considering whether or not to provide the service of general economic interest for the whole duration of the period of entrustment, taking into account the level of risk.










2.


Articles 12 and 13 of Directive 2002/22 must be interpreted as having direct effect and they may be relied on directly before a national court by individuals to challenge a decision of a national regulatory authority.










3.


Directive 2002/22 must be interpreted to the effect that it is not applicable for the purpose of determining the amount of the net cost of the obligations relating to the universal service provided by the designated undertaking during the period prior to the Czech Republic’s accession to the European Union, that is to say, for the year 2004, between 1 January and 30 April 2004.






(1)  OJ C 56, 16.2.2015.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting 5-(2-aminopropyl)indole to control measures (10012/2015 — C8-0186/2015 — 2013/0207(NLE))
Date: 2015-10-06
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, European Parliament
Subjects: EU control, drug addiction, drug traffic, health control, health risk, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, stimulant, toxicology








C_2017349EN.01008501.xml










17.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 349/85





P8_TA(2015)0327
Subjecting 5-(2-aminopropyl)indole to control measures *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 October 2015 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting 5-(2-aminopropyl)indole to control measures (10012/2015 — C8-0186/2015 — 2013/0207(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2017/C 349/16)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the Council draft (10012/2015),










—


having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on Transitional Provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0186/2015),










—


having regard to Council Decision 2005/387/JHA of 10 May 2005 on the information exchange, risk-assessment and control of new psychoactive substances (1), and in particular Article 8(3) thereof,










—


having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0263/2015),












1.


Approves the Council draft;












2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;












4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.






(1)  OJ L 127, 20.5.2005, p. 32.