do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-304/16: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom) made on 30 May 2016 — American Express Co. v The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electronic money, law of banking, payment, principle of proportionality








C_2016270EN.01003301.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/33





Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom) made on 30 May 2016 — American Express Co. v The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury
(Case C-304/16)
(2016/C 270/37)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: American Express Co.

Defendant: The Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, Diners Club International Limited, MasterCard Europe S.A.

Questions referred







1.


Does the requirement in Articles 1(5) and 2(18) of Regulation (EU) 2015/751 (1) (‘the IFR’) that a three party payment card scheme issuing card-based payment instruments with a co-branding partner or through an agent, is considered to be a four party payment card scheme, apply only to the extent that the co-branding partner or agent acts as the ‘issuer’ within the meaning of Article 2(2) and recital (29) of the IFR (namely where that partner or agent has a contractual relationship with the payer, pursuant to which it contracts to provide the payer with a payment instrument to initiate and process the payer's card-based payment transactions)?










2.


If the answer to Question (l) is ‘no’, are Articles 1(5) and 2(18) of the IFR invalid in so far as they provide that such arrangements are considered to be four party payment card schemes, on the grounds of:






(a)


failure to provide reasons in accordance with Article 296 TFEU;










(b)


manifest error of assessment; and/or










(c)


breach of the principle of proportionality?










(1)  Regulation (EU) 2015/751 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 on interchange fees for card-based payment transactions.

OJ L 123, p. 1
Case T-285/16: Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Dominator International v EUIPO (DREAMLINE)
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pleasure craft, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016260EN.01004901.xml










18.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/49





Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Dominator International v EUIPO (DREAMLINE)
(Case T-285/16)
(2016/C 260/61)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Dominator International GmbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: N. Gugerbauer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘DREAMLINE’ — Application for registration No 1 222 091

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 March 2016 in Case R 1669/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-287/16: Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Belgium v Commission
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, principle of proportionality








C_2016270EN.01006201.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/62





Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Belgium v Commission
(Case T-287/16)
(2016/C 270/68)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: J. C. Halleux and M. Jacobs, acting as Agents, and by É. Grégoire and J. Mariani, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/417 of 17 March 2016, in so far as it excludes from European Union financing in relation to the Kingdom of Belgium an amount of EUR 9 601 619,00 (budget item 6701);










—


in the alternative, partially annul that decision to exclude from European Union financing the amount of EUR 9 601 619 in so far as it includes the sum of EUR 4 106 470,02 from which the EAGF has already benefited;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging an infringement of Article 31(1) and Article 32(8) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 2005 L 209, p. 1), on the ground that the Commission fails to show that the expenditure effected by the Belgian paying agency is not compatible with EU law and that the failure to recover or the unlawfulness was caused by irregularity or negligence attributable to the Bureau d’intervention et de restitution belge (the Belgian Intervention and Restitution Board) (BIRB).










2.


Second plea in law, invoked in the alternative, alleging an infringement of Article 31(2) of Regulation No 1290/2005 and of the principle of proportionality on the ground that the amount excluded does not correspond to the significance of the lack of conformity found and that the financial loss caused to the European Union was not taken into account.
Case T-271/16: Action brought on 30 May 2016 – Pempe v EUIPO – Marshall Amplification (THOMAS MARSHALL GARMENTS OF LEGENDS)
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, audiovisual equipment, computer equipment, electrical engineering, measuring equipment, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, telecommunications equipment, trade-mark law








C_2016251EN.01004502.xml










11.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 251/45





Action brought on 30 May 2016 – Pempe v EUIPO – Marshall Amplification (THOMAS MARSHALL GARMENTS OF LEGENDS)
(Case T-271/16)
(2016/C 251/52)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Yusuf Pempe (Créteil, France) (represented by: A. Vivès-Albertini, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Marshall Amplification plc (Milton Keynes, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘THOMAS MARSHALL GARMENTS OF LEGENDS’ – Application for registration No 11 570 264

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2016 in Case R 376/2015-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


reject the oppostion in its entirety;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of the provisions of Regulation No 207/2009 concerning the proof of use and the likelihood of confusion between signs.
Council Decision (EU) 2016/878 of 30 May 2016 appointing a member, proposed by Malta of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, Malta, appointment of members








L_2016145EN.01004801.xml










2.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 145/48








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/878
of 30 May 2016
         
appointing a member, proposed by Malta of the Committee of the Regions


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 305 thereof,


Having regard to the proposal of the Maltese Government,

Whereas:







(1)


On 26 January 2015, 5 February 2015 and 23 June 2015, the Council adopted Decisions (EU) 2015/116 (1), (EU) 2015/190 (2) and (EU) 2015/994 (3) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020.












(2)


A member's seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the mandate on the basis of which Mr Samuel AZZOPARDI (Mayor of Rabat, Gozo) was proposed,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is hereby appointed as a member of the Committee of the Regions for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 25 January 2020:






—


Dr Samuel AZZOPARDI, Councillor, Rabat Citta Victoria, Local Council, Gozo (change of mandate).






Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 30 May 2016.


For the Council


The President

J. VAN RIJN
            





(1)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/116 of 26 January 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 42).

(2)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/190 of 5 February 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 31, 7.2.2015, p. 25).

(3)  Council Decision (EU) 2015/994 of 23 June 2015 appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2015 to 25 January 2020 (OJ L 159, 25.6.2015, p. 70).
Case T-273/16: Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Sun Media v EUIPO — Meta4 Spain (METAPORN)
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, Internet site, advertising, information technology industry, pornography, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016270EN.01005501.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/55





Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Sun Media v EUIPO — Meta4 Spain (METAPORN)
(Case T-273/16)
(2016/C 270/62)
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 ‘METAPORN’ — Application for registration No 11 819 281

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 March 2016 in Joined Cases R 653/2015-2 and R 674/2015-2

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 seq 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 C-307/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 30 May 2016 — Stanisław Pieńkowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Lublinie
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, provision of services, tax exemption, tax rebate, taxpayer, traveller, turnover








C_2016335EN.01003201.xml










12.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/32





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 30 May 2016 — Stanisław Pieńkowski v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Lublinie
(Case C-307/16)
(2016/C 335/42)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Stanisław Pieńkowski

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Lublinie

Question referred

Must Articles 146(1)(b), 147, 131 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which excludes application of the exemption to a taxable person who does not satisfy the condition relating to attainment of the relevant turnover ceiling for the previous tax year and who also has not concluded an agreement with a person authorised to refund tax to travellers?


(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case T-276/16: Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Viridis Pharmaceutical v EUIPO — Hecht-Pharma (Boswelan)
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016251EN.01004601.xml










11.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 251/46





Action brought on 30 May 2016 — Viridis Pharmaceutical v EUIPO — Hecht-Pharma (Boswelan)
(Case T-276/16)
(2016/C 251/53)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Viridis Pharmaceutical (Tortola, British Virgin Islands) (represented by: C. Spintig, S. Pietzcker and M. Prasse, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Hecht-Pharma GmbH (Hollnseth, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘Boswelan’ — European Union trade mark No 3 381 563

Procedure before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 February 2016 in Case R 2837/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as it rejects the applicant’s appeal against the declaration of the revocation of European Union trade mark No 003381563 in relation to ‘medicinal products for the treatment of multiple sclerosis’;










—


order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the mark;










—


Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Proper reasons for non-use of the mark;










—


Infringement of Article 83 of Regulation No 207/2009, in particular infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.
Case C-343/15: Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 30 May 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep — Nederlands) — J. Klinkenberg v Minister van Infrastructuur en Milieu
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arrangement of working time, crew, fishing controls, interprofessional agreement, maritime safety, public service employee, rest period








C_2016326EN.01001902.xml










5.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/19





Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 30 May 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep — Nederlands) — J. Klinkenberg v Minister van Infrastructuur en Milieu
(Case C-343/15) (1)

(2016/C 326/32)
Language of the case: Dutch
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.
Case C-308/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 30 May 2016 — Kozuba Premium Selection sp. z o.o., established in Warsaw, v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, building industry, delivery, engineering structure, provision of services, tax exemption








C_2016335EN.01003202.xml










12.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/32





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 30 May 2016 — Kozuba Premium Selection sp. z o.o., established in Warsaw, v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie
(Case C-308/16)
(2016/C 335/43)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Kozuba Premium Selection sp. z o.o., established in Warsaw

Respondent: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie

Question referred

Must Article 135(1)(j) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) be interpreted as precluding a national provision (point 10 of Article 43(1) of the Ustawa o podatku od towarów i usług [Law on the tax on goods and services] of 11 March 2004 [Dz. U. No 54, item 535, as amended; ‘the Law on VAT’]) under which the supply of buildings, civil engineering works or parts thereof is exempt from VAT save where:






(a)


the supply is made within the framework of the first occupation or prior to the first occupation,










(b)


the period between the first occupation and the supply of the building, civil engineering works or parts thereof was shorter than 2 years, insofar as point 14 of Article 2 of the Law on VAT defines first occupation as release for use of buildings, civil engineering works or parts thereof, in performance of taxable activities, to the first customer or user, following their:






(a)


erection or










(b)


upgrade, if the expenditure incurred for the upgrade, as defined in the regulations on income tax, constituted at least 30 % of the initial value?










(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.
Case C-303/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 30 May 2016 — Solar Electric Martinique v Ministre des finances et des comptes publics
Date: 2016-05-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, heating, photovoltaic cell, provision of services, solar collector








C_2016287EN.01001601.xml










8.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 30 May 2016 — Solar Electric Martinique v Ministre des finances et des comptes publics
(Case C-303/16)
(2016/C 287/19)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Solar Electric Martinique

Respondent: Ministre des finances et des comptes publics

Question referred

Does the sale and installation of photovoltaic panels and solar water heaters on buildings, or with a view to supplying electricity or hot water to buildings, constitute a single transaction that may be characterised as works of construction for the purposes of Article 5(5) and Article 6(1) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, (1) now Article 14(3) and Article 24(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax? (2)



(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).

(2)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).