do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-38/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 7 March 2016 — FJ v Parliament
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, disabled person, expert's report ordered by a court, health insurance








C_2016136EN.01005002.xml










18.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 136/50





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 7 March 2016 — FJ v Parliament
(Case F-38/15) (1)

(2016/C 136/73)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 178, 1/6/2015, p. 26.
Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Court of Justice of the European Union
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union








C_2016090EN.01000101.xml










7.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 90/1





Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2016/C 090/01)

Last publication


OJ C 78, 29.2.2016


Past publications


OJ C 68, 22.2.2016


OJ C 59, 15.2.2016


OJ C 48, 8.2.2016


OJ C 38, 1.2.2016


OJ C 27, 25.1.2016


OJ C 16, 18.1.2016

These texts are available on:
EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Case C-135/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Georgsmarienhütte GmbH and Others v Bundesrepublik Deutschland
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, State aid, control of State aid, electrical energy, energy consumption, financial aid, reimbursement of aid, renewable energy








C_2016211EN.01002701.xml










13.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 211/27






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main (Germany) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Georgsmarienhütte GmbH and Others v Bundesrepublik Deutschland
(Case C-135/16)
(2016/C 211/34)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Georgsmarienhütte GmbH, Stahlwerk Bous GmbH, Schmiedag GmbH, Harz Guss Zorge GmbH

Defendants: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Question referred

Does the European Commission Decision of 25 November 2014 (Commission Decision of 25.11.2014 on the aid scheme SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by Germany for the support of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users, C(2014)8786 final) (1) breach the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in so far as the Commission qualifies the limitation of the EEG-surcharge as aid within the meaning of Article 107 TFEU?


(1)  OJ 2015 L 250, p. 122.
Case C-139/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Burgos (Spain) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Juan Moreno Marín, María Almudena Benavente Cárdaba and Rodrigo Moreno Benavente v Abadía Retuerta, S.A.
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, designation of origin, product designation, trade-mark law








C_2016200EN.01000601.xml










6.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/6





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Burgos (Spain) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Juan Moreno Marín, María Almudena Benavente Cárdaba and Rodrigo Moreno Benavente v Abadía Retuerta, S.A.
(Case C-139/16)
(2016/C 200/09)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Burgos

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Juan Moreno Marín, Maria Almudena Benavente Cárdaba and Rodrigo Moreno Benavente

Other party: Abadía Retuerta, S.A.

Questions referred







1.


May the prohibitions in Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 2008/95 (1) include the use of a sign referring to the characteristic of a product or service which is that it can be found in abundance in a single place with a high degree of value and quality?










2.


May a sign with these characteristics be regarded as a sign of geographical origin in so far as the product or service will always be concentrated in a specific physical area?






(1)  Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25).
Case C-138/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Staatlich genehmigte Gesellschaft der Autoren, Komponisten und Musikverleger Reg. Gen. mbH (AKM) v Zürs.net Betriebs GmbH
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: audiovisual communications policy, broadcasting, copyright, television, transmission network








C_2016222EN.01000201.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/2






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Staatlich genehmigte Gesellschaft der Autoren, Komponisten und Musikverleger Reg. Gen. mbH (AKM) v Zürs.net Betriebs GmbH
(Case C-138/16)
(2016/C 222/02)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Handelsgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Staatlich genehmigte Gesellschaft der Autoren, Komponisten und Musikverleger Reg. Gen. mbH (AKM)

Defendant: Zürs.net Betriebs GmbH

Question referred

Are Article 3(1) or Article 5 of 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 (1) and Article 11bis (1)(ii) of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, as revised in Stockholm/Paris in 1967/1971, to be interpreted as meaning that a rule according to which the transmission of broadcasts by ‘communal antenna installations’ such as those of the defendant in the main proceedings






(a)


does not constitute a new broadcast when no more than 500 participants are connected to the installation and/or










(b)


constitutes part of the original broadcast when it involves the simultaneous, full and unaltered transmission of broadcasts of the Österreichischer Rundfunk (Austrian Broadcasting Corporation) using services within the country (Austria),




and these uses are also not covered by any other exclusive right of communication to the public at a distance within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC, and are therefore not subject to the author’s consent and are also not subject to a fee,
is contrary to EU law or to the law of the Berne Convention as an international agreement which forms part of EU law?


(1)  OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10.
Case C-137/16 P: Appeal brought on 7 March 2016 by Juozas Edvardas Petraitis against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 December 2015 in Case T-460/15, Petraitis v Commission
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Lithuania, admissibility, infringement procedure (EU), right to justice








C_2017112EN.01001302.xml










10.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/13





Appeal brought on 7 March 2016 by Juozas Edvardas Petraitis against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 December 2015 in Case T-460/15, Petraitis v Commission

(Case C-137/16 P)
(2017/C 112/19)
Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties


Appellant: Juozas Edvardas Petraitis, represented by T. Veščiūnas, advocatas

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
By order of 24 November 2016, the Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered Mr Juozas Edvardas Petraitis to bear his own costs.
Case C-140/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per le Marche (Italy) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Edra Costruzioni Soc. coop., Edilfac Srl v Comune di Maiolati Spontini
Date: 2016-03-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, free movement of goods, freedom to provide services, mutual recognition principle, occupational safety, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right of establishment, tendering, works contract








C_2016200EN.01000701.xml










6.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/7





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per le Marche (Italy) lodged on 7 March 2016 — Edra Costruzioni Soc. coop., Edilfac Srl v Comune di Maiolati Spontini
(Case C-140/16)
(2016/C 200/10)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per le Marche

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Edra Costruzioni Soc. coop., Edilfac Srl

Defendant: Comune di Maiolati Spontini

Question referred

Do the Community principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty, together with the principles of the free movement of goods, the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services, laid down in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as well as the principles deriving therefrom, such as equality of treatment, non-discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality and transparency, referred to (most recently) in Directive 2014/24/EU, (1) preclude national legislation, such as the Italian legislation founded on the combined provisions of Articles 87(4) and 86(3a) of Legislative Decree No 163 of 2006 and Article 26(6) of Legislative Decree No 81 of 2008, as interpreted, with a view to securing proper respect for, and uniform application of, the law, pursuant to Article 99 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, by judgments No 3 and No 9 of 2015 of the Plenary Assembly of the Consiglio di Stato, according to which the failure to list the corporate safety and security costs separately in tenders in a procedure for the award of a public works contract inevitably results in the exclusion of the tendering undertaking concerned, even in the case where the obligation to list that information separately was not set out either in the tender rules or on the attached form to be completed for the submission of the tender, and even though, in substantive terms, the tender in question took into account the minimum costs of corporate safety and security?


(1)  Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65).