do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-95/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 3 May 2016 — Pals v Commission
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2016222EN.01005002.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/50






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 3 May 2016 — Pals v Commission
(Case F-95/15) (1)

(2016/C 222/79)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 294, 7/9/2015, p. 84.
Case F-31/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 3 May 2016 — Noël v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Pensions — Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations — Pension rights acquired, prior to entering the service of the EU, under a national pension scheme — Transfer to the EU pension scheme — Initial proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years, made by the appointing authority and accepted by the person concerned — Withdrawal of that proposal — New proposal based on new general implementing provisions — Objection of inadmissibility — Concept of an act having adverse effect — Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2016222EN.01004101.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/41






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 3 May 2016 — Noël v Commission
(Case F-31/12) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Pension rights acquired, prior to entering the service of the EU, under a national pension scheme - Transfer to the EU pension scheme - Initial proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years, made by the appointing authority and accepted by the person concerned - Withdrawal of that proposal - New proposal based on new general implementing provisions - Objection of inadmissibility - Concept of an act having adverse effect - Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2016/C 222/53)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Marc Noël (Bergen, the Netherlands) (represented by: initially, D. de Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers, then D. de Abreu Caldas, J.-N. Louis and S. Orlandi, lawyers, and lastly, J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, D. Martin and J. Baquero Cruz, Agents, then J. Currall and G. Gattinara, Agents, then G. Gattinara, Agent, and lastly, G. Gattinara and F. Simonetti, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decisions to transfer the pension rights acquired prior to entering the service of the Commission on the basis of the PMO’s recalculated proposition.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Marc Noël shall bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 133, 5/5/2012, p. 31.
Case T-454/15: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Werner (Dynamic Life) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Dynamic Life — Earlier national word mark DYNAMIN — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, food supplement, fruit juice, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016222EN.01001702.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/17






Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Werner (Dynamic Life)
(Case T-454/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Dynamic Life - Earlier national word mark DYNAMIN - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 222/20)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: M. Pérez Serres, R. Guerras Mazón, S. Correa Rodríguez and T. González Martínez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Matthias Werner (Neufahrn, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 May 2015 (Case R 441/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Ern and Mr Werner.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Laboratorios Ern, SA, to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2015.
Case C-254/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 3 May 2016 — Glencore Grain Hungary Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatóság
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, interest, principle of proportionality, tax inspection, tax rebate, tax relief








C_2016296EN.01001901.xml










16.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 296/19





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 3 May 2016 — Glencore Grain Hungary Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatóság
(Case C-254/16)
(2016/C 296/24)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Glencore Grain Hungary Kft.

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatóság

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 183 of Directive 2006/112 (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which the period within which overpaid VAT must be refunded is to be extended up to the date on which the report drawn up following an investigation is delivered in the case where, in the course of a tax investigation procedure initiated within 30 days from the receipt of the application for a refund, a fine is imposed on the taxable person for non-compliance with an obligation?










2.


Having regard to the principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality, does Article 183 of Directive 2006/112 preclude national legislation under which, in the event of late payment of a sum, payment of default interest is excluded in the case where, in the context of an investigation concerning the refund of that sum, the taxable person was fined by the authority in connection with the obligation to cooperate, even though the investigation, which lasted several years, was significantly delayed for reasons which cannot principally be attributed to the taxable person?










3.


Must Article 183 of Directive 2006/112 and the principle of effectiveness be interpreted as meaning that a claim for payment of interest in connection with tax withheld or not allocated contrary to EU law is a substantive right which flows directly from EU law itself, such that an infringement of EU law is sufficient for a right to interest to be claimed before the courts and other authorities of the Member States?










4.


If, in the light of the answers given to the preceding questions, the referring court should conclude that the domestic legislation of the Member State is incompatible with Article 183 of the VAT Directive, would it be acting in accordance with EU law if it were to take the view that the refusal, in the decisions of the Member State’s authorities, to pay default interest was incompatible with Article 183 of the VAT Directive?






(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Case T-503/15: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Aranynektár v EUIPO — Naturval Apícola (Natür-bal) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Natür-bal — Earlier EU word mark NATURVAL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, honey, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016222EN.01001801.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/18






Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Aranynektár v EUIPO — Naturval Apícola (Natür-bal)
(Case T-503/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Natür-bal - Earlier EU word mark NATURVAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 222/21)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Aranynektár Termékgyártó és Kereskedelmi KFT (Dunavarsány, Hungary) (represented by: I. Molnár, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Naturval Apícola, SL (Monserrat, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, D. Gabarre Armengol, G. Hinarejos Mulliez, E. Bayo de Gispert and J. Rodriguez Fuensalida, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 June 2015 (Case R 1158/2014-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Naturval Apícola and Aranynektár Termékgyártó és Kereskedelmi

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Aranynektár Termékgyártó és Kereskedelmi KFT to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 354, 26.10.2015.
Case T-202/16: Action brought on 3 May 2016 — Keturi kambariai v EUIPO — Coffee In (coffee inn)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, catering industry, coffee, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016270EN.01004601.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/46





Action brought on 3 May 2016 — Keturi kambariai v EUIPO — Coffee In (coffee inn)
(Case T-202/16)
(2016/C 270/53)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: UAB Keturi kambariai (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: R. Pumputienė, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: AS Coffee In (Tallinn, Estonia)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark with the colour claim ‘black, orange, white’ containing the word elements ‘coffee inn’ — Application for registration No 11 475 233

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 March 2016 in Case R 137/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and, consequently, reject the opposition and authorise the registration of the mark applied for;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs relating to the proceedings before the Court and the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case F-136/11: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 3 May 2016 — Kovács v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Pensions — Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations — Pension rights acquired, prior to entering the service of the EU, under a national pension scheme — Transfer to the EU pension scheme — Initial proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years made by the appointing authority and accepted by the person concerned — Withdrawal by the appointing authority of its initial proposal — New proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years based on new general implementing provisions — Objection of inadmissibility — Concept of an act having adverse effect — Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2016222EN.01004001.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/40






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 3 May 2016 — Kovács v Commission
(Case F-136/11) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Pension rights acquired, prior to entering the service of the EU, under a national pension scheme - Transfer to the EU pension scheme - Initial proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years made by the appointing authority and accepted by the person concerned - Withdrawal by the appointing authority of its initial proposal - New proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years based on new general implementing provisions - Objection of inadmissibility - Concept of an act having adverse effect - Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2016/C 222/51)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Zsuzsanna Kovács (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: initially, D. de Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal, S. Orlandi and J.-N. Louis, lawyers, then D. de Abreu Caldas, S. Orlandi, and J.-N. Louis, lawyers, and lastly, J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, D. Martin and J. Baquero Cruz, Agents, then J. Currall and G. Gattinara, Agents, then G. Gattinara, Agent, and lastly, G. Gattinara and F. Simonetti, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision fixing the pension rights, acquired prior to entering the service, credited to the applicant under the EU pension scheme.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Zsuzsanna Kovács shall bear her own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 65, 3/3/2012, p. 24.
Case T-209/16: Action brought on 3 May 2016 – Apax Partners UK v EUIPO – Apax Partners Midmarket (APAX PARTNERS)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, financial services, insurance, real estate business, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016232EN.01003002.xml










27.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/30





Action brought on 3 May 2016 – Apax Partners UK v EUIPO – Apax Partners Midmarket (APAX PARTNERS)
(Case T-209/16)
(2016/C 232/39)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Apax Partners UK Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Rose and J. Warner, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Apax Partners Midmarket (Paris, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘APAX PARTNERS’ – EU trade mark No 1 805 282

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 February 2016 in Case R 1611/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in its entirety and order the registration to be reinstated in its entirety by the EUIPO;










—


order the EUIPO and any party involved in these proceedings before the Board to pay the costs of these proceedings and those of the Appeal before the Board and the Cancellation n. 779 C before the Cancellation Division.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(1)(a), 8(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case F-110/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 3 May 2016 — Grzebielec v Commission
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2016222EN.01005004.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/50






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 3 May 2016 — Grzebielec v Commission
(Case F-110/15) (1)

(2016/C 222/81)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 328, 5/10/2015, p. 36.
Case F-18/12: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 3 May 2016 — Aprili and Kilian v Commission (Civil service — Pensions — Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations — Pension rights acquired, prior to entering the service of the EU, under a national pension scheme — Transfer to the EU pension scheme — Proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years, made by the appointing authority or the AECE, accepted by the person concerned — Withdrawal of that proposal — New proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years based on new general implementing provisions — Objection of inadmissibility — Concept of an act having adverse effect — Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2016222EN.01004002.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/40






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 3 May 2016 — Aprili and Kilian v Commission
(Case F-18/12) (1)

((Civil service - Pensions - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Pension rights acquired, prior to entering the service of the EU, under a national pension scheme - Transfer to the EU pension scheme - Proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years, made by the appointing authority or the AECE, accepted by the person concerned - Withdrawal of that proposal - New proposal concerning the crediting of pensionable years based on new general implementing provisions - Objection of inadmissibility - Concept of an act having adverse effect - Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2016/C 222/52)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Sophie Aprili (Pont-à-Celles, Belgium) and Karin Kilian (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: initially, D. de Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers, then D. de Abreu Caldas, J.-N. Louis and S. Orlandi, lawyers, and lastly, J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, D. Martin and J. Baquero Cruz, Agents, then J. Currall and G. Gattinara, Agents, then G. Gattinara, Agent, and lastly, G. Gattinara and F. Simonetti, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decisions to transfer the applicants’ pension rights, acquired prior to entering the service of the Commission, on the basis of the PMO’s recalculated proposal.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Sophie Aprili and Karin Kilian shall bear their own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 138, 12/5/2012, p. 34.
Case T-204/16: Action brought on 3 May 2016 – Sun Media v EUIPO – Meta4 Spain (METABOX)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, access to information, data transmission, on line data service, registered trade mark, trade promotion, trade-mark law








C_2016232EN.01003001.xml










27.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 232/30





Action brought on 3 May 2016 – Sun Media v EUIPO – Meta4 Spain (METABOX)
(Case T-204/16)
(2016/C 232/38)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Sun Media Ltd (Central Hong Kong, Hong-Kong Special Administrative Region of China) (represented by: A. Schnider, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Meta4 Spain, SA (Las Rozas, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘METABOX’ – Application for registration No 11 819 125

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 February 2016 in Case R 307/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and, in case it intervenes in writing, the other party to the proceedings before EUIPO, to bear their own costs and to compensate the costs incurred by the plaintiff in the proceedings before the General Court and in the appellate proceedings before EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Articles 75 et sqq of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of the EUIPO’s duty to exercise its powers in accordance with the general principles of European Union law.
Case T-179/15: Order of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Lions Gate Entertainment v EUIPO (DIRTY DANCING)
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, film production, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016222EN.01003503.xml










20.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/35






Order of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Lions Gate Entertainment v EUIPO (DIRTY DANCING)
(Case T-179/15) (1)

(2016/C 222/45)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-05-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016157EN.01000201.xml










3.5.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 157/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

2 May 2016
(2016/C 157/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1493 




JPY


Japanese yen


122,47 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4414 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,78248 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1803 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0999 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,2330 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,048 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,84 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3833 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4815 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2080 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5025 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4388 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9170 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6368 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5410 




KRW


South Korean won


1 307,85 




ZAR


South African rand


16,3027 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4418 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5130 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 125,45 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4875 




PHP


Philippine peso


54,068 




RUB


Russian rouble


74,4081 




THB


Thai baht


40,076 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,9731 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,6826 




INR


Indian rupee


76,3185 






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