do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-122/16: Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (Burlington)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016175EN.01002601.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/26





Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (Burlington)
(Case T-122/16)
(2016/C 175/30)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Tulliallan Burlington Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Norris, (Barrister

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Burlington Fashion GmbH (Schmallenberg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘Burlington’ — International registration designating the European Union No 982 021

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2016 in Case R 2409/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and reject the contested mark in respect of all of the contested goods;










—


order the payment of the costs incurred by the applicant in connection with this appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(5), 8(4) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) 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 — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Canary Islands, Spain, air transport, inland transport, invitation to tender, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2016107EN.01001101.xml










22.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/11





Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) 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
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 107/06)






Member State


Spain




Concerned routes


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




Period of validity of the contract


2 years following the start of the operations




Deadline for submission of tenders


2 months following the date of publication of this notice




Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the public service obligation 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




Email: osp.dgac@fomento.es
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by the Norwegian Board of Appeal for Industrial Property Rights dated 22 March 2016 in the case of an appeal from the municipality of Oslo (Case E-5/16)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Norway, copyright, interpretation of the law, public morality, public order, registered trade mark, sculpture, trade-mark law








C_2017026EN.01001701.xml










26.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/17





Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by the Norwegian Board of Appeal for Industrial Property Rights dated 22 March 2016 in the case of an appeal from the municipality of Oslo
(Case E-5/16)
(2017/C 26/08)
A request has been made to the EFTA Court dated 22 March 2016 from the Norwegian Board of Appeal for Industrial Property Rights (Klagenemnda for industrielle rettigheter), which was received at the Court Registry on 31 March 2016, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of an appeal from the municipality of Oslo on the following questions:






1.


May trademark registration of copyright works, for which the protection period has expired, under certain circumstances, conflict with the prohibition in Article 3(1)(f) of the Trade Marks Directive on registering trademarks that are contrary to ‘public policy or … accepted principles of morality’?










2.


If question 1 is answered in the affirmative, will it have an impact on the assessment that the copyright work is well-known and of great cultural value?










3.


If question 1 is answered in the affirmative, may factors or criteria other than those mentioned in question 2 have a bearing on the assessment, and, if so, which ones?










4.


Is Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of Directive 2008/95/EC applicable to two-dimensional representations of sculptures?










5.


Is Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 2008/95/EC applicable as legal authority for refusing trademarks that are two or three-dimensional representations of the shape or appearance of the goods?










6.


If question 5 is answered in the affirmative, is Article 3(1)(b) and (c) of Directive 2008/95/EC to be understood to mean that the national registration authority, in assessing trademarks that consist of two or three-dimensional representations of the shape or appearance of the goods, must apply the assessment criterion of whether the design in question departs significantly from the norm or customs of the business sector, or may the grounds for refusal be that such a mark is descriptive of the shape or appearance of the goods?
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7866 — Activision Blizzard/King) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: automatic game, economic concentration, merger control








C_2016107EN.01000101.xml










22.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7866 — Activision Blizzard/King)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 107/01)
On 12 February 2016, 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 English 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 32016M7866. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-120/16: Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (Burlington)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016175EN.01002401.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/24





Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (Burlington)
(Case T-120/16)
(2016/C 175/28)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Tulliallan Burlington Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Burlington Fashion GmbH (Schmallenberg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘Burlington’ — International registration designating the European Union No 1 017 273

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2016 in Case R 94/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and reject the contested mark in respect of all of the contested goods;










—


order the payment of the costs incurred by the applicant in connection with this appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(5), 8(4) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-119/16: Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Topera v EUIPO (RHYTHMVIEW)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2016200EN.01002602.xml










6.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/26





Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Topera v EUIPO (RHYTHMVIEW)
(Case T-119/16)
(2016/C 200/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Topera, Inc. (Abbott Park, Illinois, United States) (represented by: H. Sheraton, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU mark ‘RHYTHMVIEW’ — Application for registration No 13 374 483

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 January 2016 in Case R 1368/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and any intervener to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-121/16: Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (BURLINGTON THE ORIGINAL)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016175EN.01002501.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/25





Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (BURLINGTON THE ORIGINAL)
(Case T-121/16)
(2016/C 175/29)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Tulliallan Burlington Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Burlington Fashion GmbH (Schmallenberg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word elements ‘BURLINGTON THE ORIGINAL’ – International registration designating the European Union No 1 007 952

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2016 in Case R 2501/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and reject the contested mark in respect of all of the contested goods;










—


order the payment of the costs incurred by the applicant in connection with this appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(5), 8(4) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/113 of 28 January 2016 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of high fatigue performance steel concrete reinforcement bars originating in the People's Republic of China (OJ L 23, 29.1.2016)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, bar, import (EU), originating product, steel








L_2016075EN.01007201.xml










22.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 75/72







Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/113 of 28 January 2016 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of high fatigue performance steel concrete reinforcement bars originating in the People's Republic of China

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 23 of 29 January 2016
)


On page 16, title:
for:


                        ‘Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/113’,

read:


                        ‘Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/113’.
Case C-166/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Celle (Germany) lodged on 22 March 2016 — Tui Deutschland GmbH v Stefan Düren
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airline, damages, disabled person, transport accident, transport company, traveller








C_2016232EN.01000202.xml










27.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/2





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Celle (Germany) lodged on 22 March 2016 — Tui Deutschland GmbH v Stefan Düren
(Case C-166/16)
(2016/C 232/03)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Celle

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Tui Deutschland GmbH

Defendant: Stefan Düren
The case was removed from the Register of the Court of Justice by order of the Court of 21 April 2016.
Case T-126/16: Action brought on 22 March 2016 — 1. FC Köln v EUIPO (SPÜRBAR ANDERS)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, paper, physical education, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016165EN.01001901.xml










10.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 165/19





Action brought on 22 March 2016 — 1. FC Köln v EUIPO (SPÜRBAR ANDERS)
(Case T-126/16)
(2016/C 165/21)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: 1. FC Köln GmbH & Co. KGaA (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt, V. Töbelmann and S. Stier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘SPÜRBAR ANDERS’ — Application No 13 468 103

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 January 2016 in Case R 718/2015-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-123/16: Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (BURLINGTON)
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016175EN.01002701.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/27





Action brought on 22 March 2016 — Tulliallan Burlington v EUIPO — Burlington Fashion (BURLINGTON)
(Case T-123/16)
(2016/C 175/31)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant(s): Tulliallan Burlington Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Burlington Fashion GmbH (Schmallenberg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the mark word mark ‘Burlington’ — International registration designating the European Union No 982 020

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2016 in Case R 1635/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and reject the contested mark in respect of all of the contested goods;










—


order the payment of the costs incurred by the applicant in connection with this appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(5), 8(4) and 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016107EN.01000201.xml










22.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 107/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

21 March 2016
(2016/C 107/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1271 




JPY


Japanese yen


125,94 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4544 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78303 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2538 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0916 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,4428 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,035 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,49 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2581 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4688 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2325 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4819 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4703 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7408 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6645 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5324 




KRW


South Korean won


1 308,05 




ZAR


South African rand


17,2448 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3028 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5215 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 874,81 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5728 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,296 




RUB


Russian rouble


76,7226 




THB


Thai baht


39,370 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,0897 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,5916 




INR


Indian rupee


74,9933 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.