do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7538 — Knorr-Bremse/Vossloh) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, holding company, merger control, railway industry, safety device








C_2015384EN.01000101.xml










18.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 384/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7538 — Knorr-Bremse/Vossloh)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 384/01)
On 14 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 32015M7538. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-508/13: Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Government of Malaysia v OHIM — Vergamini (HALAL MALAYSIA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark HALAL MALAYSIA — Earlier unregistered figurative mark HALAL MALAYSIA — Relative ground for refusal — Absence of rights to the earlier sign having been acquired in accordance with the law of the Member State before the date of application for registration of the Community trade mark — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Use of the earlier mark as a label — Common-law action for passing off — Lack of goodwill)
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Islam, goodwill, quality label, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016007EN.01002102.xml










11.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/21





Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Government of Malaysia v OHIM — Vergamini (HALAL MALAYSIA)
(Case T-508/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark HALAL MALAYSIA - Earlier unregistered figurative mark HALAL MALAYSIA - Relative ground for refusal - Absence of rights to the earlier sign having been acquired in accordance with the law of the Member State before the date of application for registration of the Community trade mark - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Use of the earlier mark as a label - Common-law action for passing off - Lack of goodwill))
(2016/C 007/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Government of Malaysia (represented by: initially R. Volterra, Solicitor, R. Miller, Barrister, V. von Bomhard and T. Heitmann, lawyers, then R. Volterra, R. Miller and V. von Bomhard)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Paola Vergamini (Castelnuovo di Garfagnana, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 June 2013 (Case R 326/2012-1) relating to opposition proceedings between the Government of Malaysia and Ms Paola Vergamini.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Government of Malaysia to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
Decision No 2/2015 of the EU-Georgia Trade and Sustainable Development Sub-Committee of 18 November 2015 establishing the list of experts on trade and sustainable development [2017/1366]
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: European Union, Georgia
Subjects: Georgia, advisory committee (EU), appointment of members, sustainable development, trade relations








L_2017191EN.01000901.xml










22.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 191/9








            DECISION No 2/2015 OF THE EU-GEORGIA TRADE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SUB-COMMITTEE
         
of 18 November 2015
         
establishing the list of experts on trade and sustainable development [2017/1366]


THE EU-GEORGIA TRADE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SUB-COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part (1) (‘the Agreement’), and in particular Article 243 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


In accordance with Article 431 of the Agreement, parts of the Agreement have been applied provisionally since 1 September 2014.












(2)


Pursuant to Article 243(3) of the Agreement, the Trade and Sustainable Development Sub-Committee is to establish a list of at least 15 individuals who are willing and able to serve as experts in panel procedures,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The list of experts on trade and sustainable development for the purposes of Article 243 of the Agreement is established as set out in the Annex.


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




Done at Tbilisi, 18 November 2015.


The Chair

Lali GOGOBERIDZE
            

Head of Economic Analysis & Policy Department, Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia — Chair and representing Georgia


Secretaries

Irakli TSIKORIDZE
            

Chief Specialist of Foreign Trade and International Economic Relations Department, Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia

Daniel KRAMER
            

Policy officer in Unit D1 — Trade and Sustainable Development, Generalized System of Preferences, Directorate-General for Trade, European Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 261, 30.8.2014, p. 4.




ANNEX

LIST OF EXPERTS ON TRADE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

I.   Experts proposed by Georgia







1.


Nata STURUA










2.


David KIKODZE










3.


Marina SHVANGIRADZE










4.


Ilia OSEPASHVILI










5.


Roin MIGRIAULI




II.   Experts proposed by the EU







1.


Eddy LAURIJSSEN










2.


Jorge CARDONA










3.


Karin LUKAS










4.


Hélène RUIZ FABRI










5.


Laurence BOISSON DE CHAZOURNES










6.


Geert VAN CALSTER




III.   Chairpersons







1.


Jill MURRAY (Australia)










2.


Janice BELLACE (USA)










3.


Ross WILSON (New Zealand)










4.


Arthur APPLETON (USA)










5.


Nathalie BERNASCONI (Switzerland)
Case F-73/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 18 November 2015 — FH v European Parliament (Civil service — Officials — Application for payment of the daily subsistence allowance — Implied rejection followed by an express rejection — No complaint against the implied rejection — Express rejection confirmatory in nature — Complaint time-barred — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, allowances and expenses, change of job








C_2016007EN.01003602.xml










11.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/36





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 18 November 2015 — FH v European Parliament
(Case F-73/15) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Application for payment of the daily subsistence allowance - Implied rejection followed by an express rejection - No complaint against the implied rejection - Express rejection confirmatory in nature - Complaint time-barred - Manifest inadmissibility))
(2016/C 007/48)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: FH (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: O. Caisou-Rousseau and N. Chemaï, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision not to grant the daily subsistence allowance to the applicant following his transfer from the Commission, where he was employed in the EU Delegation to Yemen, to the European Parliament, in Brussels.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


The European Parliament is to bear its own costs and is ordered to pay the costs incurred by FH.






(1)  OJ C 245, 27/7/2015, p. 50.
Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/2104 of 18 November 2015 establishing a prohibition of fishing for saithe in Norwegian waters south of 62° N by vessels flying the flag of Sweden
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Norwegian Sea, Sweden, catch area, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, sea fishing, ship's flag








L_2015305EN.01002901.xml










21.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 305/29








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2015/2104
of 18 November 2015
         
establishing a prohibition of fishing for saithe in Norwegian waters south of 62° N by vessels flying the flag of Sweden


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Council Regulation (EU) 2015/104 (2) lays down quotas for 2015.












(2)


According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated to the Member State referred to in the Annex to this Regulation for the stock referred to therein for 2015 shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.


Article 2

Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein shall be prohibited from the date set out in that Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.


Article 3

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 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, 18 November 2015.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

João AGUIAR MACHADO
            

Director-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) 2015/104 of 19 January 2015 fixing for 2015 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters, amending Regulation (EU) No 43/2014 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 779/2014 (OJ L 22, 28.1.2015, p. 1).




ANNEX






No


58/TQ104




Member State


Sweden




Stock


POK/04-N.




Species


Saithe (Pollachius virens)




Zone


Norwegian waters south of 62° N




Closing date


19.10.2015
Case C-607/15 P: Appeal brought on 18 November 2015 by Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 10 September 2015 in Case T-453/14 Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság v European Parliament
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bratislava region, EU activity, Slovakia, ownership, petition








C_2016243EN.01001501.xml










4.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 243/15





Appeal brought on 18 November 2015 by Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 10 September 2015 in Case T-453/14 Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság v European Parliament

(Case C-607/15 P)
(2016/C 243/15)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Appellant: Magyar Bencés Kongregáció Pannonhalmi Főapátság (represented by: D. Sobor, ügyvéd)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament
By order of 4 May 2016, the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered the applicant to pay the costs.
Case T-606/13: Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Mustang v OHIM — Dubek (Mustang) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark Mustang — Earlier national word and figurative marks MUSTANG — No risk of detriment to the reputation of the earlier marks — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No. 207/2009)
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2016007EN.01002302.xml










11.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/23





Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Mustang v OHIM — Dubek (Mustang)
(Case T-606/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark Mustang - Earlier national word and figurative marks MUSTANG - No risk of detriment to the reputation of the earlier marks - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No. 207/2009))
(2016/C 007/32)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Mustang — Bekleidungswerke GmbH & Co. KG (Künzelsau, Germany) (represented by: initially S. Völker, then C. Roos and S. Speckmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Dubek Ltd (Petach Tikva, Israel) (represented by: C. Thomas, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 September 2013 (Case R 416/2012-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mustang — Bekleidungswerke GmbH & Co. KG and Dubek Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mustang — Bekleidungswerke GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
Case C-610/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 18 November 2015 — Stichting Brein, Other parties: Ziggo BV and XS4ALL Internet BV
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet site, audiovisual piracy, computer piracy, copyright, industrial property, information society








C_2016048EN.01001302.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/13





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 18 November 2015 — Stichting Brein, Other parties: Ziggo BV and XS4ALL Internet BV
(Case C-610/15)
(2016/C 048/21)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Stichting Brein

Other parties: Ziggo BV, XS4ALL Internet BV

Questions referred







1.


Is there a communication to the public within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the Copyright Directive (1) by the operator of a website, if no protected works are available on that website, but a system exist … by means of which metadata on protected works which is present on the users’ computers is indexed and categorised for users, so that the users can trace and upload and download the protected works on the basis thereof?










2.


If the answer to Question (1) is negative:
Do Article 8(3) of the Copyright Directive and Article 11 of the Enforcement Directive (2) offer any scope for obtaining an injunction against an intermediary as referred to in those provisions, if that intermediary facilitates the infringing acts of third parties in the way referred to in Question 1?






(1)  Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10).

(2)  Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (OJ 2004 L 157, p. 45).
Special Report No 14/2015 — ‘The ACP Investment Facility: does it provide added value?’
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: ACP countries, ACP-EU relationship, EU aid, EU financing, European Investment Bank, development aid, long-term financing, medium-term financing, project evaluation, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2015384EN.01000301.xml










18.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 384/3





Special Report No 14/2015
‘The ACP Investment Facility: does it provide added value?’
(2015/C 384/03)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 14/2015 ‘The ACP Investment Facility: does it provide added value?’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://eca.europa.eu
A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:





European Court of Auditors




Publications (PUB)




12, rue Alcide De Gasperi




1615 Luxembourg




LUXEMBOURG




Tel. +352 4398-1




E-mail: eca-info@eca.europa.eu




or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.
Case T-361/13: Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Menelaus v OHIM — Garcia Mahiques (VIGOR) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark VIGOR — Earlier Community figurative mark and earlier international figurative mark VIGAR — Admissibility of evidence of use submitted on a CD-ROM — Taking into account of additional evidence which was not submitted within the time-limit set — Genuine use of the earlier marks — Articles 15 and 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character)
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, household article, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016007EN.01001901.xml










11.1.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/19





Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Menelaus v OHIM — Garcia Mahiques (VIGOR)
(Case T-361/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark VIGOR - Earlier Community figurative mark and earlier international figurative mark VIGAR - Admissibility of evidence of use submitted on a CD-ROM - Taking into account of additional evidence which was not submitted within the time-limit set - Genuine use of the earlier marks - Articles 15 and 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character))
(2016/C 007/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Menelaus BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, interveners before the General Court: Vicente Garcia Mahiques (Jesus Pobre, Spain) and Felipe Garcia Mahiques (Jesus Pobre) (represented by: E. Pérez Crespo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 April 2013 (Case R 88/2012-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between, on the one hand, Vicente Garcia Mahiques and Felipe Garcia Mahiques and, on the other hand, Menelaus BV.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Menelaus BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and by Messrs Vicente Garcia Mahiques and Felipe Garcia Mahiques.






(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.
Publication pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-11-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU control, disclosure of information, market supervision, sales representative, trade information, wood industry








C_2015384EN.01000401.xml










18.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 384/4





Publication pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 384/04)
In accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No 995/2010, the Commission shall publish the list of the monitoring organisations in the Official Journal of the European Union, C series, and shall make it available on its website. The list shall be regularly updated.
In the light of the above, the Commission hereby publishes the updated list of monitoring organisations:






Monitoring Organisation


Recognition date




AENOR (Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación)


19.10.2015




BM TRADA Latvija


1.6.2015




Bureau Veritas Certification Holding SAS


27.3.2014




Consorzio Servizi Legno-Sughero


19.8.2013




Control Union Certifications BV


27.3.2014




DIN CERTCO Gesellschaft für Konformitätsbewertung mbH


1.6.2015




GD Holz Service GmbH


30.1.2015




ICILA SRL


30.1.2015




Le Commerce du Bois


30.1.2015




NEPCon


19.8.2013




SGS United Kingdom Limited


30.1.2015




Soil Association Woodmark


30.1.2015