do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-128/15: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien v OHIM — Ruiz Moncayo (RED RIDING HOOD) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark RED RIDING HOOD — Earlier national and international word marks ROTKÄPPCHEN — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity between the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016048EN.01005001.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/50





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien v OHIM — Ruiz Moncayo (RED RIDING HOOD)
(Case T-128/15) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark RED RIDING HOOD - Earlier national and international word marks ROTKÄPPCHEN - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 048/57)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH (Freyburg, Germany) (represented by: W. Berlit, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Alberto Ruiz Moncayo (Entrena, Spain) (represented by E. Valentín Prades, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 January 2015 (Case R 1012/2014-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH and Alberto Ruiz Moncayo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 171, 26.5.2015.
Case T-9/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Air Canada v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European airfreight market — Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) — Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, fine, infringement of EU law, international cartel, price agreement








C_2016048EN.01002901.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/29





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Air Canada v Commission
(Case T-9/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European airfreight market - Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) - Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Obligation to state reasons))
(2016/C 048/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Air Canada (Quebec, Canada) (represented by: S. Kim, H. Bignall, J. Pheasant and T. Capel, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by S. Noë and N. von Lingen, subsequently by J. Bourke and S. Noë, and lastly by A. Dawes and H. Leupold, acting as Agents, and by G. Peretz, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns the applicant, and, in the alternative, for the reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns Air Canada;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Air Canada.






(1)  OJ C 72, 5.3.2011.
Case T-36/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Japan Airlines v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European airfreight market — Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) — Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, fine, infringement of EU law, international cartel, price agreement








C_2016048EN.01003101.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/31





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Japan Airlines v Commission
(Case T-36/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European airfreight market - Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) - Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Obligation to state reasons))
(2016/C 048/35)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Japan Airlines Co. Ltd, formerly Japan Airlines International Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, K. Van Hove, lawyers, and R. Burton, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by N. von Lingen and S. Noë, subsequently by S. Noë, and J. Bourke, and finally by A. Dawes, acting as Agents, and by J. Holmes, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight) and, in the alternative, for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant and on Japan Airlines Corp.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns Japan Airlines Co. Ltd and Japan Airlines Corp.;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.
Case F-34/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 16 December 2015 — De Loecker v EEAS (Civil service — EEAS staff — Temporary staff — Psychological harassment — Articles 12a and 24b of the Staff Regulations — Request for assistance — Rejection — Request to open an administrative investigation — Right to be heard — Infringement)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: administrative procedure, managing director, psychological harassment, temporary employment








C_2016048EN.01009602.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/96





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 16 December 2015 — De Loecker v EEAS
(Case F-34/15) (1)

((Civil service - EEAS staff - Temporary staff - Psychological harassment - Articles 12a and 24b of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Rejection - Request to open an administrative investigation - Right to be heard - Infringement))
(2016/C 048/110)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Stéphane De Loecker (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and M. Silva, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application to annul the decision to reject the complaint of psychological harassment lodged by the applicant against the Chief Operating Officer of the EEAS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Annuls the decision of 14 April 2014 by which the European External Action Service rejected the request for assistance under Articles 12a and 24 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union made by Mr De Loecker;










2.


Orders the European External Action Service to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr De Loecker.






(1)  OJ C 178, 1/6/2015, p. 25.
Case T-38/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Cathay Pacific Airways v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European airfreight market — Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) — Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, fine, infringement of EU law, international cartel, price agreement








C_2016048EN.01003201.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/32





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Cathay Pacific Airways v Commission
(Case T-38/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European airfreight market - Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) - Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Obligation to state reasons))
(2016/C 048/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd (Queensway, Hong Kong, China) (represented initially by D. Vaughan QC, R. Kreisberger, Barrister, B. Bar-Bouyssiere, lawyer, and M. Rees, Solicitor, then by D. Vaughan, R. Kreisberger and M. Rees)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by S. Noë, N. von Lingen and J. Bourke, and subsequently by A. Dawes, acting as Agents, and by J. Holmes, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns the applicant, and, in the alternative, for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Articles 2, 3 and 5 of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as they concern Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Cathay Pacific Airways.






(1)  OJ C 72, 5.3.2011.
Commission communication 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 — Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Canary Islands, Spain, air transport, inland transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2015418EN.01001601.xml










16.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/16





Commission communication 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
Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
(2015/C 418/08)






Member State


Spain




Route concerned


Gran Canaria — Tenerife Sur
Gran Canaria — El Hierro
Tenerife Norte — La Gomera
Gran Canaria — La Gomera




Reopening date of the PSO routes to community air carriers


1.8.2016




Address where the text and any other information or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained.







Ministerio de Fomento




Dirección General de Aviación Civil




Subdirección General de Transporte Aéreo




Paseo de la Castellana 67




28071 Madrid




ESPAÑA




Tel. +34 915977505




Fax: +34 915978643




E-mail: osp.dgac@fomento.es








The routes subject to public service obligations may be operated on the basis of free competition access as from 1 August 2016. If within a period of 15 calendar days following the date of publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, no air carrier submits a programme of services compliant with the public service obligations imposed, access will be restricted to a single air carrier through the corresponding public tender procedure, in accordance with Article 16(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008.
Case T-39/11: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Cargolux Airlines v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European airfreight market — Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) — Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, fine, infringement of EU law, international cartel, price agreement








C_2016048EN.01003301.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/33





Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Cargolux Airlines v Commission
(Case T-39/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European airfreight market - Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) - Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Obligation to state reasons))
(2016/C 048/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Cargolux Airlines International SA (Sandweiler, Luxembourg) (represented initially by J. Joshua, Barrister, and G. Goeteyn, Solicitor, and subsequently by G. Goeteyn and T. Soames, Solicitors, C. Rawnsley, Barrister, and E. Aliende Rodríguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by N. Khan, S. Noë and N. von Lingen, acting as Agents, and by O. Jones and subsequently by S. Love, Barristers, and represented subsequently by N. Khan and A. Dawes, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns the applicant, and, in the alternative, for the reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Articles 1 to 5 of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as they concern Cargolux Airlines International SA;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Cargolux Airlines International.






(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 2012-2013 SESSION Sittings of 19 to 22 November 2012 The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 29 E, 31.1.2013. TEXTS ADOPTED
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: EP resolution, European Parliament








C_2015419EN.01000101.xml










16.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 419/1






EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2012-2013 SESSION
Sittings of 19 to 22 November 2012

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 29 E, 31.1.2013.

TEXTS ADOPTED
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, Spain, catch area, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, sea fishing








C_2015418EN.01001501.xml










16.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/15





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2015/C 418/07)
In accordance with Article 35(3) of 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), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


3.12.2015




Duration


3.12 – 31.12.2015




Member State


Spain




Stock or Group of stocks


GHL/N3LMNO




Species


Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides)




Zone


NAFO 3LMNO




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


67/TQ104






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7793 — Lone Star Fund IX/MRH) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, motor fuel, ownership, retail trade








C_2015418EN.01001701.xml










16.12.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/17





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7793 — Lone Star Fund IX/MRH)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 418/09)






1.


On 8 December 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 Lone Star Fund IX (USA), belonging to the Lone Star group (‘Lone Star’, USA) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the undertaking MRH (GB) Limited (‘MRH’, UK) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Lone Star is a group of private equity funds that invests in real estate, equity, credit and other financial assets,










—


MRH owns and operates retail motor fuel service stations in the UK and Channel Islands.














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 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.7793 — Lone Star Fund IX/MRH, 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.
Case F-118/14: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 16 December 2015 — Bärwinkel v Council (Civil service — Officials — Reform of the Staff Regulations — Transitional rules concerning assignment to types of posts — Article 30(2) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations — Concept of measure adversely affecting a person — Decision recognising that certain officials hold special responsibilities — Non-inclusion of the applicant's name in the first list of 34 officials recognised as holding special responsibilities — Requirements referring to the pre-litigation procedure — No complaint within the meaning of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations — Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2015-12-16
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: administrator, classification, staff assessment








C_2016048EN.01009901.xml










8.2.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/99





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 16 December 2015 — Bärwinkel v Council
(Case F-118/14) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Reform of the Staff Regulations - Transitional rules concerning assignment to types of posts - Article 30(2) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations - Concept of measure adversely affecting a person - Decision recognising that certain officials hold special responsibilities - Non-inclusion of the applicant's name in the first list of 34 officials recognised as holding special responsibilities - Requirements referring to the pre-litigation procedure - No complaint within the meaning of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations - Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2016/C 048/114)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Wolfgang Bärwinkel (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by M. Bauer and E. Rebasti, acting as Agents, and subsequently by M. Bauer and M. Veiga, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for the annulment of Council decisions on the classification of officials in grades AD 9 to AD 14 occupying posts identified as holding special responsibilities in the type of post ‘Head of unit or equivalent’ or ‘Adviser or equivalent’ before 31 December 2015 and not placing the applicant among the officials so classified.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Each party is to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 26, 26/1/2015, p. 48.