do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7853 — CMA CGM/Bollore/Kribi JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carriage of goods, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, maritime shipping, merger control, port administration








C_2016137EN.01000101.xml










19.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7853 — CMA CGM/Bollore/Kribi JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 137/01)
On 12 April 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 language 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 32016M7853. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016137EN.01000401.xml










19.4.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/4





Euro exchange rates (1)

18 April 2016
(2016/C 137/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1306 




JPY


Japanese yen


122,32 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4417 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,79780 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1948 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0916 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3325 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,022 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,33 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3059 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4749 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2251 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4685 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4612 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7688 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6303 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5328 




KRW


South Korean won


1 299,62 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5061 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3241 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5050 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 890,95 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4404 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,253 




RUB


Russian rouble


76,7591 




THB


Thai baht


39,605 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,9606 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,9043 




INR


Indian rupee


75,2740 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-550/15: Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Portugal v Commission (Action for annulment — EAGF and EAFRD — Period within which proceedings must be commenced — Point from which time starts to run — Delay — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, EU aid, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture








C_2016200EN.01002301.xml










6.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/23





Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Portugal v Commission
(Case T-550/15) (1)

((Action for annulment - EAGF and EAFRD - Period within which proceedings must be commenced - Point from which time starts to run - Delay - Inadmissibility))
(2016/C 200/33)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, M. Figueiredo, P. Estêvão and J. Saraiva de Almeida, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and A. Sauka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1119 of 22 June 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD (OJ 2015 L 182, p. 39) in so far as that decision excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Portuguese Republic.

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:






1.


The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.










2.


The Portuguese Republic shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 389, 23.11.2015.
Case T-36/12: Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Athens Resort Casino v Commission (State aid — Annulment of the contested measure — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, State aid, budgetary resources, competition, control of State aid, economic forecasting, gaming establishment, infringement of EU law, tax relief








C_2016232EN.01002201.xml










27.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/22





Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Athens Resort Casino v Commission
(Case T-36/12) (1)

((State aid - Annulment of the contested measure - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 232/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Athens Resort Casino AE Symmetochon (Maroussi, Greece) (represented by: N. Niejahr, lawyer, F. Carlin, Barrister, Q. Azau, F. Spyropoulos, I. Dryllerakis, K. Spyropoulos, A. Komninos, K. Struckmann, lawyers, and M. Powell, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, H. van Vliet and P. J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE (Loutraki, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/716/EU of 24 May 2011 on State aid C 16/10 (ex NN 22/10, ex CP 318/09) implemented by Greece in favour of certain Greek casinos (OJ 2011 L 285, p. 25).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Athens Resort Casino AE Symmetochon










3.


Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 17.3.2012.
Case C-218/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Gorzowie Wielkopolskim (Poland) lodged on 19 April 2016 — Aleksandra Kubicka
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: inheritance, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, law of succession, mutual recognition principle, private international law, real property








C_2016335EN.01003002.xml










12.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/30





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Gorzowie Wielkopolskim (Poland) lodged on 19 April 2016 — Aleksandra Kubicka
(Case C-218/16)
(2016/C 335/39)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Gorzowie Wielkopolskim

Applicant in the main proceedings

Aleksandra Kubicka

Question referred

Must Article 1(2)(k), Article 1(2)(1) and Article 31 of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession (1) be interpreted as permitting refusal to recognise the material effects of a legacy by vindication (legatum per vindicationem), as provided for by [Polish] succession law, if that legacy concerns the right of ownership of immovable property located in a Member State the law of which does not provide for legacies having direct material effect?


(1)  OJ 2012 L 201, p. 107.
Case T-261/15: Judgment of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Spirig Pharma v EUIPO (Daylong) (EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative trade mark Daylong — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, medical device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016191EN.01002801.xml










30.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/28





Judgment of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Spirig Pharma v EUIPO (Daylong)
(Case T-261/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative trade mark Daylong - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 191/36)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Spirig Pharma AG (Egerkingen, Switzerland) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Melgar and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 March 2015 (Case R 2455/2014-4), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign Daylong as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Spirig Pharma AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 245, 27.7.2015.
Case T-14/12: Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Elliniko Kazino Parnithas v Commission (State aid — Annulment of the contested measure — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, State aid, control of State aid, gaming establishment, tax relief








C_2016232EN.01002101.xml










27.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/21





Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Elliniko Kazino Parnithas v Commission
(Case T-14/12) (1)

((State aid - Annulment of the contested measure - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 232/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Elliniko Kazino Parnithas AE (Maroussi, Greece) (represented by: N. Niejahr, lawyer, F. Carlin, Barrister, Q. Azau, F. Spyropoulos, I. Dryllerakis, K. Spyropoulos, A. Komninos, K. Struckmann, lawyers, and M. Powell, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, H. van Vliet and P.-J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE (Loutraki, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/716/EU of 24 May 2011 on State aid C 16/10 (ex NN 22/10, ex CP 318/09) implemented by Greece in favour of certain Greek casinos (OJ 2011 L 285, p. 25).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Elliniko Kazino Parnithas AE.










3.


Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 65, 3.3.2012.
Case T-635/11: Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Regency Entertainment Psychagogiki kai Touristiki v Commission (State aid — Annulment of the contested measure — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, State aid, control of State aid, economic discrimination, gaming establishment, rights of the defence








C_2016232EN.01002002.xml










27.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/20





Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Regency Entertainment Psychagogiki kai Touristiki v Commission
(Case T-635/11) (1)

((State aid - Annulment of the contested measure - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 232/27)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Regency Entertainment Psychagogiki kai Touristiki AE (Maroussi Attikis, Greece) (represented by: N. Niejahr, lawyer, F. Carlin, Barrister, Q. Azau, F. Spyropoulos, I. Dryllerakis, K. Spyropoulos, A. Komninos, K. Struckmann, lawyers, and M. Powell, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P.-J. Loewenthal, D. Triantafyllou and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE (Loutraki, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/716/EU of 24 May 2011 on State aid C 16/10 (ex NN 22/10, ex CP 318/09) implemented by Greece in favour of certain Greek casinos (OJ 2011 L 285, p. 25).

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Regency Entertainment Psychagogiki kai Touristiki AE.










3.


Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 32, 4.2.2012.
Case T-419/11: Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — ETAD v Commission (State aid — Annulment of the contested measure — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, State aid, control of State aid, gaming establishment, reimbursement of aid








C_2016222EN.01001901.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/19






Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — ETAD v Commission
(Case T-419/11) (1)

((State aid - Annulment of the contested measure - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 222/22)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Etaireia Akiniton Dimosiou AE (ETAD), formerly Ellinika Touristika Akinita AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Frangakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, H. van Vliet and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Elliniko Kazino Kerkyras AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Frangakis, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE (Loutraki, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Re:

Application for the annulment of Commission Decision 2011/716/EU of 24 May 2011 on State aid to certain Greek casinos C 16/10 (ex NN 22/10, ex CP 318/09) implemented by the Hellenic Republic (OJ L 285, p. 25).

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:






1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


The European Commission shall pay its own costs and pay those incurred by Etaireia Akiniton Dimosiou AE (ETAD) and Elliniko Kazino Kerkyras.










3.


Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE shall pay their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
Case T-551/15: Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Portugal v Commission (Action for annulment — EAGF and EAFRD — Period within which proceedings must be commenced — Point from which time starts to run — Delay — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, EU aid, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture








C_2016200EN.01002401.xml










6.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 200/24





Order of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Portugal v Commission
(Case T-551/15) (1)

((Action for annulment - EAGF and EAFRD - Period within which proceedings must be commenced - Point from which time starts to run - Delay - Inadmissibility))
(2016/C 200/34)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, M. Figueiredo, P. Estêvão and J. Saraiva de Almeida, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and J. Guillem Carrau, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1119 of 22 June 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2015 L 182, p. 39) in so far as that decision excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Portuguese Republic.

Operative part of the order

The Court hereby orders:






1.


The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.










2.


The Portuguese Republic shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 389, 23.11.2015.
Case T-167/16: Action brought on 19 April 2016 — Poland v Commission
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: animal plague, epidemic, live animal, principle of proportionality, regions of Poland, swine, trade restriction, veterinary inspection








C_2016243EN.01003401.xml










4.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 243/34





Action brought on 19 April 2016 — Poland v Commission
(Case T-167/16)
(2016/C 243/37)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/180 of 9 February 2016 amending the Annex to Implementing Decision 2014/709/EU concerning animal health control measures relating to African swine fever in certain Member States, as regards the entries for Estonia, Lithuania and Poland (OJ 2016 L 35, p. 12) in so far as the gmina (commune) of Czyże, the remaining part of the gmina of Zabłudów and the gmina of Hajnówka together with the city of Hajnówka are included in Part II of the Annex to Decision 2014/709/EU;










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant puts forward three pleas in law in support of its action.






1.


First plea in law: infringement of the principle of proportionality by reason of the failure to have regard for the requirement that the contested measures must be necessary for achieving the intended objectives, the failure to have regard for the requirement that the contested measures must be appropriate for achieving the intended objectives, and the failure to have regard for the requirement that those measures must be strictly proportionate.










2.


Second plea in law: failure to comply with essential formal requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ 2011 L 55, p. 13) and in the rules of procedure of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed.










3.


Third plea in law: failure to comply with the obligation to set out reasons for the contested decision.
Case T-326/14: Judgment of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Novomatic v EUIPO — Granini France (HOT JOKER) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark HOT JOKER — Earlier national figurative mark Joker — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, game of chance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016191EN.01002401.xml










30.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/24





Judgment of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — Novomatic v EUIPO — Granini France (HOT JOKER)
(Case T-326/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark HOT JOKER - Earlier national figurative mark Joker - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2016/C 191/30)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Novomatic AG (Gumpoldskirchen, Austria) (represented by: W. Mosing, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Bullock, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Granini France (Mâcon, France) (represented by: D. Lichtlen, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2014 (Case R 589/2013-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Granini France and Novomatic AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Novomatic AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
Case T-198/14: Judgment of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — 100 % Capri Italia v EUIPO — IN.PRO.DI (100 % Capri) (European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark 100 % Capri — Earlier European Union figurative mark CAPRI — Relative ground for refusal — Distinctive character — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-04-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016191EN.01002301.xml










30.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 191/23





Judgment of the General Court of 19 April 2016 — 100 % Capri Italia v EUIPO — IN.PRO.DI (100 % Capri)
(Case T-198/14) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark 100 % Capri - Earlier European Union figurative mark CAPRI - Relative ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 191/28)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: 100 % Capri Italia Srl (Capri, Italy) (represented by: A. Perani, G. Ghisletti and F. Braga, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Inghirami produzione distribuzione SpA (IN.PRO.DI), formerly Cantoni ITC SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: V. Piccarreta and M. Franzosi, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 January 2014 (Case R 2122/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Inghirami produzione distribuzione SpA (IN.PRO.DI) and 100 % Capri Italia Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders 100 % Capri Italia Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.