do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-358/13: Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Italian Republic v Commission (EAFRD — Clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the EAFRD — Decision declaring a certain amount to be non-reusable in connection with the Basilicata Region Rural Development Plan — Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Basilicata, EAFRD, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, closing of accounts, rural development








C_2015398EN.01003401.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/34





Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Italian Republic v Commission
(Case T-358/13) (1)

((EAFRD - Clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the EAFRD - Decision declaring a certain amount to be non-reusable in connection with the Basilicata Region Rural Development Plan - Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 - Obligation to state reasons))
(2015/C 398/44)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri and B. Tidore, acting as Agents, and M. Salvatorelli, avoccato dello Stato)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina and P. Rossi, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2013/209/EU of 26 April 2013 on the clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) for the 2012 financial year (OJ 2013 L 118, p. 23), in so far as it classifies as a ‘non-reusable amount’ the amount of EUR 5 0 06  487,10 relating to the Basilicata Region (Italy) Rural Development Plan.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council applying the arrangements for products originating in certain states which are part of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States provided for in agreements establishing, or leading to the establishment of, Economic Partnership Agreements (recast) (COM(2015) 282 final — 2015/0128 (COD))
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ACP countries, cooperation agreement (EU), economic cooperation, import (EU), most favoured nation, originating product, tariff exemption








C_2016032EN.01002301.xml










28.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 32/23





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council applying the arrangements for products originating in certain states which are part of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States provided for in agreements establishing, or leading to the establishment of, Economic Partnership Agreements (recast)
(COM(2015) 282 final — 2015/0128 (COD))
(2016/C 032/05)
On 24 June 2015, the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the:

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council applying the arrangements for products originating in certain states which are part of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States provided for in agreements establishing, or leading to the establishment of, Economic Partnership Agreements (recast)

(COM(2015) 282 final — 2015/0128 (COD)).
Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 511th plenary session of 6, 7 and 8 October 2015 (meeting of 8 October 2015), with 70 votes in favour and 6 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 8 October 2015.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Georges DASSIS
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7755 — Mahindra/MHI/MAM) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agricultural machinery, commercial vehicle, economic concentration, electrical equipment, merger control








C_2015331EN.01000102.xml










8.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7755 — Mahindra/MHI/MAM)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 331/02)
On 11 September 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 the English language 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 32015M7755. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7706 — Kinnevik/Qliro Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronic commerce, investment company, merger control, retail selling








C_2015331EN.01000701.xml










8.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/7





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7706 — Kinnevik/Qliro Group)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 331/08)






1.


On 30 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 undertaking Investment AB Kinnevik (Sweden, ‘Kinnevik’) ultimately controlled by Verdere Sàrl (Luxembourg, ‘Verdere’), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Qliro Group AB (Sweden, ‘Qliro’) by way of other means.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Kinnevik: private equity investment in various companies active primarily in telecommunications, e-commerce, entertainment and financial services.
—   for Qliro: e-commerce operator active in online retail sales to consumers of a variety of products, including inter alia, electronics, clothing, workout equipment and children's product.










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.7706 — Kinnevik/Qliro Group, 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.
Commission notice pursuant to Article 16(4) 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 — Invitations to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, air transport, invitation to tender, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2015331EN.01000301.xml










8.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/3





Commission notice pursuant to Article 16(4) 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
Invitations to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 331/04)






Member State


France




Routes concerned


Strasbourg-Amsterdam
Strasbourg-Madrid
Strasbourg-Prague




Period of validity of the contract


from 9 April 2016 to 8 April 2019




Deadline for the submission of applications and tenders


10 December 2015 by 17.00 Paris time (France)




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







Direction de la Sécurité de l’Aviation civile Nord-Est




Aéroport de Strasbourg-Entzheim




CS 60003 Entzheim




67836 Tanneries Cedex




FRANCE




Tel. +33 388596464




E-mail: dsac-ne.direction@aviation-civile.gouv.fr
Case F-41/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 8 October 2015 — FK v CEPOL
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, damages, dismissal, indemnification, reassignment








C_2015381EN.01006501.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/65





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 8 October 2015 — FK v CEPOL
(Case F-41/15) (1)

(2015/C 381/91)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 178, 1.6.2015, p. 28.
Case T-547/13: Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Rosian Express v OHIM (Shape of a games box) (Community trade mark — Application for a three-dimensional Community trade mark — Shape of a games box — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Right to be heard — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, toy industry, trade-mark law








C_2015398EN.01003601.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/36





Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Rosian Express v OHIM (Shape of a games box)
(Case T-547/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional Community trade mark - Shape of a games box - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2015/C 398/46)
Language of the case: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Rosian Express SRL (Medias, Romania) (represented by: E. Grecu and A. Tigau, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar and A. Geavela, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 July 2013 (case R 797/2013-5), relating to an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a games box as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rosian Express SRL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 367, 14.12.2013.
Case T-78/14: Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Benediktinerabtei St. Bonifaz v OHIM — Andexhser Molkerei Scheitz (Genuß für Leib & Seele KLOSTER Andechs SEIT 1455) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark Genuß für Leib & Seele KLOSTER Andechs SEIT 1455 — Earlier Community figurative mark SEIT 1908 ANDECHSER NATUR and earlier national figurative mark ANDECHSER NATUR — Relative ground of refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, milk product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015398EN.01004202.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/42





Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Benediktinerabtei St. Bonifaz v OHIM — Andexhser Molkerei Scheitz (Genuß für Leib & Seele KLOSTER Andechs SEIT 1455)
(Case T-78/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark Genuß für Leib & Seele KLOSTER Andechs SEIT 1455 - Earlier Community figurative mark SEIT 1908 ANDECHSER NATUR and earlier national figurative mark ANDECHSER NATUR - Relative ground of refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 398/53)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Benediktinerabtei St. Bonifaz Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts (Munich, Germany) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Andexhser Molkerei Scheitz GmbH (Andechs, Germany) (represented by: S. Jackermeier, lawyer).

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 November 2013 (Case R 1272/2012-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Andechser Mokerei Scheitz GmbH and Benediktinerabtei St. Bonifaz Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Benediktinerabtei St. Bonifaz Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5. 2014.
Case T-464/14 P: Order of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Nieminen v Council (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Promotion — 2010 and 2011 promotion procedures — Decision not to promote the appellant to grade AD 12 — Right to a fair hearing — Rights of defence — Scope of the judicial review at first instance — Manifest error of assessment — No error of law and of distortion — Appeal manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, pay scale, promotion, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2015389EN.01005801.xml










23.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/58





Order of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Nieminen v Council
(Case T-464/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2010 and 2011 promotion procedures - Decision not to promote the appellant to grade AD 12 - Right to a fair hearing - Rights of defence - Scope of the judicial review at first instance - Manifest error of assessment - No error of law and of distortion - Appeal manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2015/C 389/66)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Risto Nieminen (Kraainem, Belgium) (represented by: initially, M. de Abreu Caldas, D. de Abreu Caldas and J.-N. Louis, and subsequently, J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and E. Rebasti, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 10 April 2014 in Nieminen v Council (F-81/12, ECR-SC, EU:F:2014:50), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Risto Nieminen shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2015331EN.01000201.xml










8.10.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

7 October 2015
(2015/C 331/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1266




JPY


Japanese yen


135,30




DKK


Danish krone


7,4615




GBP


Pound sterling


0,73580




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2924




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0882




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,2580




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,099




HUF


Hungarian forint


312,17




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2300




RON


Romanian leu


4,4174




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2997




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5586




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4649




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7312




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6966




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5870




KRW


South Korean won


1 299,71




ZAR


South African rand


15,0690




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1621




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6095




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 492,07




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7400




PHP


Philippine peso


51,829




RUB


Russian rouble


69,9561




THB


Thai baht


40,401




BRL


Brazilian real


4,3238




MXN


Mexican peso


18,6678




INR


Indian rupee


73,1140






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-90/14: Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Secolux v Commission (Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Safety checks — Rejection of a tenderer’s bid — Award of the contract to another tenderer — Non-contractual liability)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, damages, invitation to tender, services contract








C_2015398EN.01004301.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/43





Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Secolux v Commission
(Case T-90/14) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Safety checks - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Award of the contract to another tenderer - Non-contractual liability))
(2015/C 398/54)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Secolux, Association pour le contrôle de la sécurité de la construction (Capellen, Luxembourg) (represented by: N. Prüm-Carré and E. Billot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Delaude and S. Lejeune, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 3 December 2013 rejecting the tenders submitted by the applicant in the context of a call for tenders concerning the provision of safety checks services and, secondly, a claim for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Secolux, Association pour le contrôle de la sécurité de la construction, to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
Joined Cases F-106/13 and F-25/14: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 8 October 2015 — DD v FRA (Civil service — FRA staff — Member of the temporary staff — Career development report — Internal appeal — Accusations of discrimination — Accusations of victimisation within the meaning of Directive 2000/43 — Administrative enquiry — Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary penalty — Reprimand — Articles 2, 3, and 11 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations — Termination of a contract of indefinite duration — Article 47(c)(i) of the CEOS — Right to be heard — Article 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)
Date: 2015-10-08
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: administrative sanction, damages, disciplinary proceedings, equal treatment, servant (EU), termination of a contract, work contract








C_2015381EN.01006201.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/62





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 8 October 2015 — DD v FRA
(Joined Cases F-106/13 and F-25/14) (1)

((Civil service - FRA staff - Member of the temporary staff - Career development report - Internal appeal - Accusations of discrimination - Accusations of victimisation within the meaning of Directive 2000/43 - Administrative enquiry - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary penalty - Reprimand - Articles 2, 3, and 11 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations - Termination of a contract of indefinite duration - Article 47(c)(i) of the CEOS - Right to be heard - Article 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union))
(2015/C 381/87)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: DD (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (represented by: M. Kjærum, acting as Agent, and P. Jenkinson, lawyer)

Re:


Case F-106/13: Application for annulment of the decision of the Director of the FRA imposing a disciplinary penalty, in the form of a reprimand, on the applicant.

Case F-25/14: Application for annulment of the decision terminating the applicant’s contract and of the decision rejecting his complaint and an application for damages in respect of the non-material and material harm allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Annuls the decision of 20 February 2013 by which the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights imposed a reprimand on DD;










2.


Annuls the decision of 13 June 2013 by which the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights terminated DD’s contract of indefinite duration as a member of the temporary staff;










3.


Dismisses the actions in Joined Cases F-106/13 and F-25/14 as to the remainder;










4.


Declares that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights is to bear its own costs and orders it to bear the costs incurred by DD.






(1)  OJ C 45, 15.2.2014, p. 46 and OJ 184, 16.6.2014, p. 43.