do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-583/15: Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2016 — Monster Energy v EUIPO (Representation of a peace symbol) (EU trade mark — Application for an EU figurative mark representing a peace symbol — Application for restitutio in integrum — Non-compliance with the time limit for bringing an action before the General Court)
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016270EN.01004201.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/42





Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2016 — Monster Energy v EUIPO (Representation of a peace symbol)
(Case T-583/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a peace symbol - Application for restitutio in integrum - Non-compliance with the time limit for bringing an action before the General Court))
(2016/C 270/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 July 2015 (Case R 2788/2014-2), concerning an application for registration as an EU trade mark of a figurative sign representing a peace symbol.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Monster Energy Company to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 414, 14.12.2015.
Case T-6/16: Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2016 — AWG v EUIPO — Takko (Southern Territory 23°48’25’’S) (EU trade mark — Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity — EU word mark Southern Territory 23°48’25’’S — Earlier EU word mark SOUTHERN — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017239EN.01004601.xml










24.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 239/46





Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2016 — AWG v EUIPO — Takko (Southern Territory 23o48’25’’S)

(Case T-6/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity - EU word mark Southern Territory 23o48’25’’S - Earlier EU word mark SOUTHERN - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 239/57)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: AWG Allgemeine Warenvertriebs GmbH (Köngen, Germany) (represented by: T. Sambuc, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Takko Holding GmbH (Telgte, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 November 2015 (Case R 735/2015-4), concerning invalidity proceedings between Takko Holding and AWG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the action;










2.


orders AWG Allgemeine Warenvertriebs GmbH to bear its own costs and those of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).






(1)  OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.
Notification by Italy of the application of Article 19(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 concerning traffic distribution rules for the airports Milan Malpensa, Milan Linate and Orio al Serio (Bergamo) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: Italy
Subjects: Italy, Lombardy, airline, airport, inland transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2016204EN.01000701.xml










8.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 204/7





Notification by Italy of the application of Article 19(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 concerning traffic distribution rules for the airports Milan Malpensa, Milan Linate and Orio al Serio (Bergamo)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 204/03)
Pursuant to Article 19(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community (1), on 23 April 2015 the Commission received notification from Italy of a draft Decree amending Decree No 15 of 3 March 2000 on the distribution of air traffic within the Milan airport system, as amended (2), and abolishing Ministerial Decree No 395 of 1 October 2014 (3).
On 17 December 2015 the Commission had adopted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 a negative decision on Ministerial Decree No 395 of 1 October 2014 (4) which modified the traffic distribution rules within the Milan airport system (the so-called ‘Lupi Decree’). The Commission found that, contrary to the provisions of this Regulation, Italy had failed to consult interested parties before modifying the traffic distribution rules.
Italy therefore prepared and notified a new draft Decree. The notified draft Decree, when adopted and entered into force, will modify the traffic distribution rules within the Milan airport system in the same way as the Lupi Decree did. It will remove any limitations at Linate airport on the number of daily return services to EU airports identified on the basis of passenger traffic volume. The limitations with respect to the use of narrow-body (single-aisle) aircraft and the operation of point-to-point scheduled connections at Linate airport will remain in place. At the same time the notified draft Decree will abolish the Lupi Decree.
The Commission invites interested parties to submit their comments within 15 days of publication of this communication, to:





Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport (Unit E4 internal market and airports)




European Commission




Office: DM24 05/84




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: Christophe.Dussart@ec.europa.eu






(1)  OJ L 293, 31.10.2008, p. 3.

(2)  Italian Official Gazette No 60 of 13 March 2000 and Italian Official Gazette No 14 of 18 January 2001.

(3)  Italian Official Gazette No 237 of 11 October 2014.

(4)  OJ L 333, 19.12.2015, p. 124.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Colombia on the short-stay visa waiver (12095/2015 — C8-0390/2015 — 2015/0201(NLE))
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Colombia, EU visa policy, Schengen Agreement, agreement (EU), external border of the EU, foreign national, ratification of an agreement








C_2018086EN.01016101.xml










6.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 86/161





P8_TA(2016)0256
EU-Colombia Agreement on the short-stay visa waiver ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Colombia on the short-stay visa waiver (12095/2015 — C8-0390/2015 — 2015/0201(NLE))
(Consent)
(2018/C 086/32)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (12095/2015),










—


having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Colombia on the short-stay visa waiver (12094/2015),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 77(2), point (a) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0390/2015),










—


having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0178/2016),












1.


Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Colombia.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (13085/2014 — C8-0009/2015 — 2014/0224(NLE))
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: Committee on Development, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: Croatia, Philippines, accession to the European Union, cooperation agreement (EU), cooperation policy, framework agreement, protocol to an agreement, ratification of an agreement








C_2018086EN.01017201.xml










6.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 86/172





P8_TA(2016)0261
EU-Philippines Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation (accession of Croatia) ***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (13085/2014 — C8-0009/2015 — 2014/0224(NLE))
(Consent)
(2018/C 086/37)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (13085/2014),










—


having regard to the draft Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (13082/2014),










—


having regard to request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 207 and 209 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0009/2015),










—


having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2), and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0148/2016),












1.


Gives its consent to conclusion of the protocol;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of the Philippines.
Case C-324/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 1 de Santa Cruz de Tenerife (Spain) lodged on 8 June 2016 — Dragados, S.A. v Cabildo Insular de Tenerife
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, debt, interest, payment, public contract, trading operation








C_2016305EN.01001601.xml










22.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 1 de Santa Cruz de Tenerife (Spain) lodged on 8 June 2016 — Dragados, S.A. v Cabildo Insular de Tenerife
(Case C-324/16)
(2016/C 305/22)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 1 — Santa Cruz de Tenerife

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Dragados, S.A.

Defendant: Cabildo Insular de Tenerife

Questions referred

Regard being had to Articles 4(1), 6 and 7(2) and (3) of Directive 2011/7/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 on combating late payment in commercial transactions: (1)







1.


Must Article 7(2) of the directive be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may not make recovery of the principal debt conditional on the waiver of the right to interest for late payment?










2.


Must Article 7(3) of the directive be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may not make recovery of the principal debt conditional on the waiver of the right to compensation for recovery costs?
Should the answer to those two questions be in the affirmative,










3.


Where the debtor is a contracting authority, can it rely on the freedom of contract of the parties in order to avoid its obligation to pay interest for late payment and compensation for recovery costs?






(1)  OJ 2011 L 48, p. 1.
Case F-146/15: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 8 June 2016 — Massoulié v Parliament (Civil service — Officials — Parliament — Inter-institutional transfer — 2014 promotion exercise — Request seeking the conversion of staff reports into merit points — Reclassification of a complaint as a request — Article 90 of the Staff Regulations — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2016-06-08
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: administrator, pay scale, promotion, staff assessment, staff regulations (EU)








C_2016260EN.01005202.xml










18.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/52





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 8 June 2016 — Massoulié v Parliament
(Case F-146/15) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Parliament - Inter-institutional transfer - 2014 promotion exercise - Request seeking the conversion of staff reports into merit points - Reclassification of a complaint as a request - Article 90 of the Staff Regulations - Manifest inadmissibility))
(2016/C 260/65)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: François Massoulié (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: V. Montebello-Demogeot and M. Dean, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Parliament’s decision rejecting the applicant’s request for the staff reports drawn up since his promotion to grade AD 12 to be converted into merit points.

Operative part of the order







1.


Mr François Massoulié’s action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Massoulié is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Parliament.






(1)  OJ C 68, 22.2.2016, p. 45.