do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Notice from the Government of the Republic of Cyprus concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: Cyprus
Subjects: Cyprus, extraction of oil, hydrocarbon, mineral prospecting, offshore drilling, petroleum exploration








C_2016110EN.01000501.xml










24.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 110/5





Notice from the Government of the Republic of Cyprus concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 110/04)
Without prejudice to the application of the provisions regarding national security, of Article 2(2) of Directive 94/22/EC, the Republic of Cyprus hereby notifies all interested persons that the criteria, which shall be used when granting authorisations for the prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons, are:






(a)


the technical and financial ability of the applicants;










(b)


the ways in which the applicant intends to carry out the activities that are specified in the licence;










(c)


the financial consideration that the applicant is offering in order to obtain the licence; and,










(d)


any lack of efficiency and responsibility that the applicant has shown under any previous licence or authorisation of any form in any country of the world.




If, following evaluation under the above criteria, two or more applications have equal merit, the proposals of the applicants regarding the protection of public safety, public health, security of transport, protection of the environment, protection of biological resources and of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value, safety of installations and workers and planned management of hydrocarbon resources, shall be taken into account.
In accordance with Article 5(2) of Directive 94/22/EC, information on the conditions and requirements concerning the exercise or termination of the activity, which apply to the type of authorisations that are to be granted, is contained in the relevant legislation and in a Model Exploration and Production Sharing Contract, which will be made available on the website of the Ministry of Energy, Commerce, Industry and Tourism on the following web address: www.mcit.gov.cy (tel. +357 22409310, fax +357 22409348, email: Third.LR@mcit.gov.cy).
Information relating to the entry into force of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and Kosovo (This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.), of the other part
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EAEC, Kosovo, cooperation policy, stabilisation and association agreement




L_2016078EN.01000101.xml










24.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 78/1







Information relating to the entry into force of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and Kosovo (*1), of the other part

As the procedures necessary for the entry into force of the abovementioned Agreement have been completed on 26 February 2016, this Agreement enters into force on 1 April 2016, in accordance with its Article 144.


(*1)  This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.
Case C-171/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski Rayonen Sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 24 March 2016 — Criminal proceedings against Trayan Beshkov
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carrying out of sentence, criminal proceedings, enforcement of ruling, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, offence








C_2016200EN.01001102.xml










6.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/11





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski Rayonen Sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 24 March 2016 — Criminal proceedings against Trayan Beshkov
(Case C-171/16)
(2016/C 200/17)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski Rayonen Sad

Party to the main proceedings

Trayan Beshkov

Questions referred







1.


How must the expression ‘new criminal proceedings’ used in Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted, and must that expression necessarily be connected with a finding of guilt in respect of an offence committed or can it also relate to proceedings in which, under the national law of the second Member State, the penalty imposed in an earlier judgment must absorb another sanction or be included in it or must be enforced separately?










2.


Must Article 3(1), read in conjunction with recital 13, of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted as permitting national rules which provide that proceedings in which an earlier judgment delivered in another Member State must be taken into account may not be initiated by the sentenced person but only by the Member State in which the earlier judgment was delivered or by the Member State in which the new criminal proceedings are taking place?










3.


Must Article 3(3) of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted as meaning that the Member State in which the new criminal proceedings are taking place may not change the manner of execution of the penalty imposed by the Member State which issued the earlier sentence, including in the event that, under the national law of the second Member State, the penalty imposed by the earlier judgment must absorb another sanction or be included in it or must be enforced separately?
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016110EN.01000201.xml










24.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 110/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

23 March 2016
(2016/C 110/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1171 




JPY


Japanese yen


126,01 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4542 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78985 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,2315 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0894 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,4863 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,038 




HUF


Hungarian forint


313,79 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2563 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4655 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2111 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4780 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4676 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6628 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6676 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5280 




KRW


South Korean won


1 300,58 




ZAR


South African rand


17,1475 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2648 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5415 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 760,87 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4673 




PHP


Philippine peso


51,848 




RUB


Russian rouble


75,8478 




THB


Thai baht


39,311 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,0600 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,4942 




INR


Indian rupee


74,6175 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-129/16: Action brought on 24 March 2016 — Claranet Europe v EUIPO — Claro (claranet)
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, software, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2016175EN.01003001.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/30





Action brought on 24 March 2016 — Claranet Europe v EUIPO — Claro (claranet)
(Case T-129/16)
(2016/C 175/34)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Claranet Europe Ltd (St Helier, Jersey) (represented by: G. Crown and D. Farnsworth, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Claro SA (São Paulo, Brazil)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark in red ‘claranet’ — Application for registration No 11 265 113

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 January 2016 in Case R 803/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO (and if applicable, any intervener) to bear its own and pay the applicant’s costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-128/16: Action brought on 24 March 2016 — SureID v EUIPO (SUREID)
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, security services, trade-mark law








C_2016175EN.01002901.xml










17.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 175/29





Action brought on 24 March 2016 — SureID v EUIPO (SUREID)
(Case T-128/16)
(2016/C 175/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: SureID, Inc. (Hillsboro, Oregon, United States) (represented by: B. Brandreth, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘SUREID’ — Application for registration No 13 698 675

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 January 2016 in Case R 1478/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs incurred before the Board of Appeal and the General Court.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) Regulation No 207/2009.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.7969 — GIP/CPPIB/Asciano Businesses) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-03-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, rail transport








C_2016110EN.01000101.xml










24.3.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 110/1





Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case M.7969 — GIP/CPPIB/Asciano Businesses)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 110/01)
(Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004)
On 26 February 2016, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration between GIP, CPPIB and Asciano Businesses. On 18 March 2016, the notifying party/ies informed the Commission that it/they withdrew its/their notification.