do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-83/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 1 March 2016 — Pujante Cuadrupani v GSA (Civil service — Recruitment — Temporary staff — Dismissal at the end of the probationary period — Action for annulment brought against both the dismissal decision and the confirmatory dismissal decision — Whether admissible — Third paragraph of Article 14 of the CEOS — Misuse of powers and abuse of process — Manifest error of assessment — Rights of the defence — Consultation of the Joint Evaluation Committee — Opinion based on examining written material without hearing the applicant — No infringement of the rights of the defence)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European GNSS Agency, dismissal, probationary period, rights of the defence, servant (EU), staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2016136EN.01004801.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/48





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 1 March 2016 — Pujante Cuadrupani v GSA
(Case F-83/15) (1)

((Civil service - Recruitment - Temporary staff - Dismissal at the end of the probationary period - Action for annulment brought against both the dismissal decision and the confirmatory dismissal decision - Whether admissible - Third paragraph of Article 14 of the CEOS - Misuse of powers and abuse of process - Manifest error of assessment - Rights of the defence - Consultation of the Joint Evaluation Committee - Opinion based on examining written material without hearing the applicant - No infringement of the rights of the defence))
(2016/C 136/68)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Antonio Pujante Cuadrupani (Murcia, Spain) (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: European GNSS Agency (represented by: O. Lambinet and D. Petrlík, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the applicant’s probationary report and the subsequent decision of the Executive Director of the European GNSS Agency to dismiss him at the end of his probationary period.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Pujante Cuadrupani to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European GNSS Agency.






(1)  OJ C 279, 24.8.2015, p. 60.
Corrigendum to the definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2016/150 of the European Union's general budget for the financial year 2016 (OJ L 48, 24.2.2016)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: adoption of the budget, financial year, general budget (EU)








L_2016053EN.01002401.xml










1.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 53/24







Corrigendum to the definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2016/150 of the European Union's general budget for the financial year 2016

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 48 of 24 February 2016
)


On page 1996, the table shall be replaced with the following one:










‘Function group and grades


Court of Justice of the European Union




2016


2015




Permanent posts


Temporary posts


Permanent posts


Temporary posts




AD 16


5


—


5


—




AD 15


10


1


10


1




AD 14


64 (1)



57 (1)



45 (1)



49 (1)





AD 13


101


—


120


—




AD 12


99 (2)



86


99 (2)



75




AD 11


50


97


50


82




AD 10


122


44


80


38




AD 9


182


2


222


2




AD 8


119


1


79


1




AD 7


139


—


160


—




AD 6


16


—


19


—




AD 5


35


28


48


28




Total


942


316


937


276




AST 11


10


—


10


—




AST 10


17


1


17


1




AST 9


32


—


32


—




AST 8


63


5


63


5




AST 7


48


31


48


31




AST 6


48


28


52


24




AST 5


105


47


83


51




AST 4


94


59


102


42




AST 3


126


27


131


13




AST 2


29


5


32


5




AST 1


3


—


—


—




Total


575


203


570


172




AST/SC 6


—


—


—


—




AST/SC 5


—


—


—


—




AST/SC 4


—


—


—


—




AST/SC 3


—


3


—


3




AST/SC 2


34


—


40


—




AST/SC 1


—


—


—


—




Total


34 (3)



3 (3)



40 (3)



3 (3)






General total




1 551 
 (4)




522




1 547 
 (4)




451






Grand total




2 073 
 (5)




1 998 
 (6)’







(1)  Of which one AD 15 ad personam.


(2)  Of which one AD 14 ad personam.


(3)  At this stage, the institution is not able to accurately assess the number of posts required.

(4)  Not including the contingency reserve, without allocation of appropriations, for officials seconded to Members of the Court of Justice, the General Court or the Civil Service Tribunal (6 AD 12, 12 AD 11, 20 AD 10, 15 AD 7, 11 AST 6, 17 AST 5, 21 AST 4 and 8 AST 3).

(5)  Certain posts occupied part-time may be made up by the appointment of other staff within the limit of the remaining posts thus left unoccupied by function group.

(6)  Posts occupied part-time may be made up by appointing other staff to fill the number of posts thus left unoccupied in each category.
Case T-40/09: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — Advance Magazine Publishers v OHIM — Selecciones Americanas (VOGUE CAFÉ) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Community word mark VOGUE CAFÉ — Earlier national figurative marks Vogue and VOGUE studio and application for the Community figurative mark VOGUE — Genuine use of earlier marks — Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016136EN.01002401.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/24





Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — Advance Magazine Publishers v OHIM — Selecciones Americanas (VOGUE CAFÉ)
(Case T-40/09) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Community word mark VOGUE CAFÉ - Earlier national figurative marks Vogue and VOGUE studio and application for the Community figurative mark VOGUE - Genuine use of earlier marks - Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 136/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: T. Alkin, Barrister)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially R. Pethke and D. Botis, and subsequently I. Harrington, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Selecciones Americanas, SA (Sitges, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 November 2008 (Case R 0280/2008-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Selecciones Americanas, SA and Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 November 2008 (Case R 0280/2008-4), in so far as it concludes that there is a likelihood of confusion between the Community trade mark applied for, VOGUE CAFÉ, and the Spanish figurative mark VOGUE studio registered under number 2529728;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.
Case C-440/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 March 2016 — National Iranian Oil Company v Council of the European Union, European Commission (Appeal — Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran — List of persons and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources — Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 — Legal basis — Criterion relating to the material, logistical or financial support for the Government of Iran)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Iran, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal basis, trade restriction








C_2016156EN.01000902.xml










2.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 156/9






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 March 2016 — National Iranian Oil Company v Council of the European Union, European Commission
(Case C-440/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran - List of persons and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 - Legal basis - Criterion relating to the material, logistical or financial support for the Government of Iran))
(2016/C 156/12)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: National Iranian Oil Company (represented by: J.-M. Thouvenin, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: A. Aresu, D. Gauci and L. Gussetti, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders National Iranian Oil Company to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 421, 24.11.2014.
Case C-129/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Szolnoki Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 1 March 2016 — Túrkevei Tejtermelő Kft. v Országos Környezetvédelmi és Természetvédelmi Főfelügyelőség
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU environmental policy, administrative sanction, air quality, damages, environmental liability, environmental protection, polluter pays principle








C_2016211EN.01002502.xml










13.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 211/25






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Szolnoki Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 1 March 2016 — Túrkevei Tejtermelő Kft. v Országos Környezetvédelmi és Természetvédelmi Főfelügyelőség
(Case C-129/16)
(2016/C 211/32)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Szolnoki Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Túrkevei Tejtermelő Kft.

Defendant: Országos Környezetvédelmi és Természetvédelmi Főfelügyelőség

Questions referred







1.


Do Article 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2004/35/EC (1) on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage preclude a provision of national law which — going beyond the ‘polluter pays’ principle — permits the environmental protection agency to hold specifically the owner of the property liable to pay compensation for the environmental damage caused, without it first being necessary to determine whether there is a causal link between the conduct of that person (a commercial undertaking) and the pollution caused?










2.


If the first question is to be answered in the negative and, with regard to the air pollution it is not necessary to remedy the environmental damage, may a fine aimed at protecting air quality be imposed on the basis of legislation of the Member State which is more stringent than Article 16 of Directive 2004/35/EC and Article 193 TFEU, or can that more stringent legislation not, at any rate, result in the imposition of a fine which is solely punitive in nature on the owner of the property, which is not responsible for the pollution caused?






(1)  Directive 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (OJ 2004 L 143, p. 56).
Case C-132/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 1 March 2016 — Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia v Iberdrola Inmobiliaria Real Estate Investments EOOD
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, building industry, provision of services, tax exemption, tax relief








C_2016175EN.01001201.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 1 March 2016 — Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia v Iberdrola Inmobiliaria Real Estate Investments EOOD
(Case C-132/16)
(2016/C 175/13)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Varhoven administrativen sad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, Sofia

Defendant: Iberdrola Inmobiliaria Real Estate Investments EOOD

Questions referred







1.


Do Article 26(1)(b), Article 168(a) and Article 176 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax preclude a provision of national law such as Article 70(1)(2) of the Zakon za danak varhu dobavenata stoynost (Law on value added tax), which restricts the right to deduct input VAT in respect of the supply of services relating to construction or improvement of a property owned by a third party, which are used both by the recipient of the supply and by the third party, for the sole reason that the third party enjoys the result of those services free of charge, without taking into account the fact that the services are to be used in the context of the economic activity of the taxable recipient?










2.


Do Article 26(1)(b), Article 168(a) and Article 176 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax preclude a tax practice consisting of refusing to recognise the right to deduct the input VAT in respect of the supply of services, where the expenditure corresponding to those services is counted among the taxable person’s general costs, on the ground that it was incurred in order to construct or improve a property owned by another person, without taking into account the fact that that property is also to be used by the recipient of the supply of building services in the context of its economic activity?






(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case T-94/16: Action brought on 1 March 2016 — Sheridan v Parliament
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, access to EU information, allowances and expenses, data protection, personal data, provision of documents








C_2016145EN.01003301.xml










25.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 145/33






Action brought on 1 March 2016 — Sheridan v Parliament
(Case T-94/16)
(2016/C 145/40)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Gavin Sheridan (Midleton, Ireland) (represented by: N. Pirc Musar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul decision A(2015)13844 C of the European Parliament of 14 January 2016 rejecting the applicant’s confirmatory application for access to certain documents relating to information on Members’ of the European Parliament travel expenses, subsistence allowances, general expenditure allowances and staffing arrangements expenses;










—


order the Parliament to pay the applicant’s costs pursuant to Articles 134 and 140 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, including the costs of any intervening parties.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments raised by the applicant are, in essence, identical or similar to those raised in Case T-639/15, Psara v Parliament (OJ 2016 C 48, p. 53).
Case T-95/16: Action brought on 1 March 2016 — Aydin v EUIPO — Kaporal France (ROYAL & CAPORAL)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electro-magnetic equipment, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, office supplies, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2016156EN.01005201.xml










2.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 156/52






Action brought on 1 March 2016 — Aydin v EUIPO — Kaporal France (ROYAL & CAPORAL)
(Case T-95/16)
(2016/C 156/70)
Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties


Applicant: Savas Aydin (Pantin, France) (represented by: F. Watrin, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kaporal France (Marseilles, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘ROYAL & CAPORAL’ — Application for registration No 12 587 663

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 December 2015 in Case R 867/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to register the trade mark ROYAL & CAPORAL (application No 12 587 663);










—


order the unsuccessful parties to pay the costs and expenses.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-79/14: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — Secop v Commission (State aid — Rescuing firms in difficulty — Aid in the form of a State guarantee — Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market — Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure — Serious difficulties — Procedural rights of the interested parties)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, State aid, aid to undertakings, company in difficulties, control of State aid, machinery, reimbursement of aid








C_2016136EN.01002902.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/29





Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — Secop v Commission
(Case T-79/14) (1)

((State aid - Rescuing firms in difficulty - Aid in the form of a State guarantee - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Failure to initiate the formal investigation procedure - Serious difficulties - Procedural rights of the interested parties))
(2016/C 136/41)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Secop GmbH (Flensburg, Germany) (represented by: U. Schnelle and C. Aufdermauer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Armati, T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2013) 9119 final of 18 December 2013, concerning State aid SA.37640 — Rescue aid for ACC Compressors SpA — Italy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Secop GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 85, 22.3.2014.
Case T-61/15: Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — 1&1 Internet v OHIM — Unoe Bank (1e1) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark 1e1 — Earlier national word mark UNO E and earlier figurative mark unoe — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Internet site, advertising, consultancy, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016136EN.01003301.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/33





Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — 1&1 Internet v OHIM — Unoe Bank (1e1)
(Case T-61/15) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark 1e1 - Earlier national word mark UNO E and earlier figurative mark unoe - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 136/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: 1&1 Internet AG (Montabaur, Germany) (represented by: G. Klopp, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Unoe Bank, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: N. González-Alberto Rodríguez, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2014 (Case R 101/2014-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Unoe Bank, SA and 1&1 Internet AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2014 (Case R 101/2014-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Unoe Bank, SA and 1&1 Internet AG;










2.


Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by 1&1 Internet AG;










3.


Orders Unoe Bank, SA to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016079EN.01000701.xml










1.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 79/7





Euro exchange rates (1)

29 February 2016
(2016/C 79/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0888




JPY


Japanese yen


123,14




DKK


Danish krone


7,4602




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78580




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3219




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0914




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,5043




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


27,057




HUF


Hungarian forint


311,26




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3543




RON


Romanian leu


4,4757




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2273




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5260




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4767




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4651




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6557




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5325




KRW


South Korean won


1 347,54




ZAR


South African rand


17,4563




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,1351




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,6263




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 559,43




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5870




PHP


Philippine peso


51,615




RUB


Russian rouble


82,6432




THB


Thai baht


38,827




BRL


Brazilian real


4,3394




MXN


Mexican peso


19,8005




INR


Indian rupee


74,3825






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Special Report No 2/2016 — ‘2014 report on the follow-up of the European Court of Auditors’ Special Reports’
Date: 2016-03-01
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: European Commission, activity report, audit, budgetary control, financial management, general budget (EU), publication of accounts, recommendation (EU)








C_2016079EN.01000801.xml










1.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 79/8





Special Report No 2/2016
‘2014 report on the follow-up of the European Court of Auditors’ Special Reports’
(2016/C 79/03)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 2/2016 ‘2014 report on the follow-up of the European Court of Auditors’ Special Reports’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu or on EU Bookshop: https://bookshop.europa.eu