do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-308/14: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Coordination of social security systems — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Article 4 — Equal treatment as regards access to social security benefits — Right of residence — Directive 2004/38/EC — National legislation under which child benefit and child tax credit are not granted to nationals of other Member States who do not have a right of lawful residence)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: dependant, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, family benefit, national law, residence, residence permit, social-security harmonisation, tax relief








C_2016305EN.01000401.xml










22.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/4





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(Case C-308/14) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Coordination of social security systems - Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 - Article 4 - Equal treatment as regards access to social security benefits - Right of residence - Directive 2004/38/EC - National legislation under which child benefit and child tax credit are not granted to nationals of other Member States who do not have a right of lawful residence))
(2016/C 305/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin and M. Wilderspin, acting as Agents)

Defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: M. Holt and J. Beeko, acting as Agents, and J. Coppel QC)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 22.9.2014.
Case T-385/15: Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2016 — Loops v EUIPO (Shape of a toothbrush) (EU trade mark — International registration designating the European Union — Three-dimensional mark — Shape of a toothbrush — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dental medicine, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016270EN.01004102.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/41





Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2016 — Loops v EUIPO (Shape of a toothbrush)
(Case T-385/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Three-dimensional mark - Shape of a toothbrush - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 270/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Loops, LLC (Dover, Delaware, United States) (represented by: T. Schmidpeter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek and A. Schifko, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 April 2015 (Case R 1917/2014-2), concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a toothbrush as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Loops, LLC, to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 302, 14.9.2015.
Case T-303/16: Action brought on 14 June 2016 — Novartis Europharm v Commission
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: market approval, medicinal product, scientific report, scientific research








C_2016296EN.01002402.xml










16.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 296/24





Action brought on 14 June 2016 — Novartis Europharm v Commission
(Case T-303/16)
(2016/C 296/33)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Novartis Europharm Ltd (Camberley, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Schoonderbeek, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Decision by the European Commission of 4 April 2016 (C(2016) 2083(final)); and










—


order the European Commission to pay its own costs and those of Novartis.





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 that the Commission’s Decision of 4 April 2016 is unlawful in that it constitutes an infringement of the orphan market exclusivity rights of Novartis for its product TOBI Podhaler pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 (1) on orphan medicinal products and because the conditions in Article 8(3) of that regulation for granting a derogation from these orphan market exclusivity rights have not been fulfilled.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s Decision of 4 April 2016 has been prepared and adopted in violation of the ‘Duty of Care’ also known as the ‘Principle of Diligence’, specifically because of a failure to take into account all relevant scientific data about the medicinal products concerned, and because of a failure to consult Novartis as an interested party in the scientific assessment.






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1999 on orphan medicinal products (OJ L 18, 22.1.2000, p. 1)
Case C-361/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — European Commission v Peter McBride and Others (Appeal — Resource conservation measures and restructuring of the fisheries sector — Requests for increased safety tonnage — Annulment by the European Union judicature of the decision initially rejecting those requests — Article 266 TFEU — Repeal of the legal basis on which that initial decision was founded — Competence and legal basis to adopt new decisions — Annulment by the General Court of new decisions rejecting the requests — Principle of legal certainty)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: application of EU law, enforcement of ruling, jurisdiction, principle of legal certainty








C_2016305EN.01000502.xml










22.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/5





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — European Commission v Peter McBride and Others
(Case C-361/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Resource conservation measures and restructuring of the fisheries sector - Requests for increased safety tonnage - Annulment by the European Union judicature of the decision initially rejecting those requests - Article 266 TFEU - Repeal of the legal basis on which that initial decision was founded - Competence and legal basis to adopt new decisions - Annulment by the General Court of new decisions rejecting the requests - Principle of legal certainty))
(2016/C 305/07)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister-at-Law)

Other parties to the proceedings: Peter McBride, Hugh McBride, Mullglen Ltd, Cathal Boyle, Thomas Flaherty, Ocean Trawlers Ltd, Patrick Fitzpatrick, Eamon McHugh, Eugene Hannigan, Larry Murphy, Brendan Gill (represented by: N. Travers, Senior Counsel, D. Barry, Solicitor, and E. Barrington, Senior Counsel)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 339, 29.9.2014.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8063 — Caixabank/Banco BPI) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: banking, economic concentration, financial institution, financial services, insurance company, merger control, reinsurance, supplementary pension








C_2016212EN.01000201.xml










14.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/2





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8063 — Caixabank/Banco BPI)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 212/03)
On 8 June 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 32016M8063. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7941 — Saint-Gobain Glass France/Corning/JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, glass, merger control, motor vehicle industry, vehicle parts








C_2016212EN.01000102.xml










14.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7941 — Saint-Gobain Glass France/Corning/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 212/02)
On 17 May 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 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 32016M7941. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-566/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — Jean-Charles Marchiani v European Parliament (Appeal — Member of the European Parliament — Parliamentary assistance allowance — Recovery of undue payments — Recovery — Implementing Measures of the Statute for Members of the Parliament — Respect for the rights of the defence — Principle of impartiality — Limitation — Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 — Articles 78 to 81 — Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 — Articles 81, 82 and 93 — Principle of protection of legitimate expectations — Reasonable time)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Member of Parliament, allowances and expenses, limitation of legal proceedings, rights of the defence








C_2016305EN.01000602.xml










22.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 305/6





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — Jean-Charles Marchiani v European Parliament
(Case C-566/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Member of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of undue payments - Recovery - Implementing Measures of the Statute for Members of the Parliament - Respect for the rights of the defence - Principle of impartiality - Limitation - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 - Articles 78 to 81 - Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 - Articles 81, 82 and 93 - Principle of protection of legitimate expectations - Reasonable time))
(2016/C 305/09)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Jean-Charles Marchiani (represented by: C.S. Marchiani, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: G. Corstens and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr Jean-Charles Marchiani to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 34, 2.2.2015.
Case T-305/16: Action brought on 14 June 2016 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — Primark Holdings (LOVE TO LOUNGE)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016287EN.01002601.xml










8.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 287/26





Action brought on 14 June 2016 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — Primark Holdings (LOVE TO LOUNGE)
(Case T-305/16)
(2016/C 287/32)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: M. Kefferpütz and A. Berger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Primark Holdings (Dublin, Ireland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘LOVE TO LOUNGE’ — EU trade mark No 8 500 548

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 March 2016 in Case R 489/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and declare invalid EU trade mark No 8 500 548;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings;










—


order the intervener to pay the costs of the proceedings before the EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-595/15: Order of the General Court of 14 June 2016 — Europäischer Tier- und Naturschutz and Giesen v Commission (Action for annulment — Alleged refusal to submit a legislative proposal for the establishment of a European law association — Act not amenable to review — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU law, European Convention on Human Rights, anti-discriminatory measure, charter on human rights, equality before the law, freedom of association, non-profit organisation








C_2016279EN.01002802.xml










1.8.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 279/28





Order of the General Court of 14 June 2016 — Europäischer Tier- und Naturschutz and Giesen v Commission
(Case T-595/15) (1)

((Action for annulment - Alleged refusal to submit a legislative proposal for the establishment of a European law association - Act not amenable to review - Manifest inadmissibility))
(2016/C 279/42)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Europäischer Tier- und Naturschutz eV (Much, Germany) and Horst Giesen (Much) (represented by: P. Brockmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Krämer and K.-P. Wojcik, Agents)

Re

Action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of the Commission’s letter of 17 August 2015 by which it declined to submit a legislative proposal aimed at establishing a European association.

Operative part







1)


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2)


Europäischer Tier- und Naturschutz eV and Horst Giesen are ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
Case F-121/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 14 June 2016 — Fernández González v Commission (Civil service — Temporary member of staff — Staff member posted in the cabinet of a European commissioner — Recruitment of a temporary member of staff under Article 2(b) of the CEOS — Condition requiring a six-month break from any form of employment with the Commission — Point 3.2 of Commission Note D(2005)18064 of 28 July 2005 on the hiring of temporary members of staff under Article 2(b) and (d) of the CEOS to fill permanent posts in the event that no candidates are shortlisted following a competition)
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: competition (EU), damages, indemnification, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), work contract








C_2016270EN.01006801.xml










25.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/68





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge) of 14 June 2016 — Fernández González v Commission
(Case F-121/15) (1)

((Civil service - Temporary member of staff - Staff member posted in the cabinet of a European commissioner - Recruitment of a temporary member of staff under Article 2(b) of the CEOS - Condition requiring a six-month break from any form of employment with the Commission - Point 3.2 of Commission Note D(2005)18064 of 28 July 2005 on the hiring of temporary members of staff under Article 2(b) and (d) of the CEOS to fill permanent posts in the event that no candidates are shortlisted following a competition))
(2016/C 270/75)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Elia Fernández González (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld and É. Boigelot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, acting as Agents, and D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s candidature for the post advertised in the vacancy notice COM/2014/2036, on the basis of the failure to comply with the condition requiring a six-month break between contracts prior to the recruitment of a member of staff who has previously been employed under a contract at grade AT2c, as provided for in note D(2005)18064 of 28 July 2005 of DG HR, and for compensation in respect of the material and non-material damage which the applicant claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ms Elia Fernández González.






(1)  OJ C 354, 26.10.2015, p. 57.
Case F-29/16: Action brought on 14 June 2016 — ZZ and Others v Commission
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: administrator, damages, dependant, indemnification, pay scale, right to justice, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), survivor's benefit








C_2016335EN.01005301.xml










12.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/53





Action brought on 14 June 2016 — ZZ and Others v Commission
(Case F-29/16)
(2016/C 335/69)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicants: ZZ and Others (represented by: C. Cortese, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision withholding amounts from a pension adopted by the Commission under Article 85 of the Staff Regulations and determining that an amount of EUR 22 368,13 be withheld from the survivor’s pension granted to the applicant and from the orphan’s pension granted in respect of his three children.

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Tribunal should:






—


annul the decision of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO.4) of 17 August 2015 concerning recovery of sums overpaid in respect of survivor’s and orphan’s pensions, in relation to the entitlements of ZZ and of his two minor daughters and, to the extent necessary, the express decision rejecting the complaint;










—


annul the decision of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO.4) of 17 August 2015 concerning recovery of sums overpaid in respect of survivor’s and orphan’s pensions, in relation to the entitlements of X and, to the extent necessary, the implied decision rejecting the complaint;










—


order the Commission to compensate the material and non-material damage suffered by the applicants owing to the breach of their right to good administration and of the Administration’s duty of care towards them, amounting, respectively:






—


to the difference between the remuneration received by ZZ as a temporary agent of the EFSA in grade AD 9, and the remuneration that he would receive as an official of the Commission in grade AD 12, for a period of one year;










—


to the amount of the recovery sought from the applicants in the contested decision, increased by the difference between the pensions amount determined in Statement of amendment No 2 and the amount determined in Statement of amendment No 3, from the date on which Statement No 3 takes effect until such time as the family will be in a position to resettle in its earlier place of residence, that period being equitably estimated at one year from resolution of the present case;














—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016212EN.01001801.xml










14.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 212/18





Euro exchange rates (1)

13 June 2016
(2016/C 212/08)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1268 




JPY


Japanese yen


119,51 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4356 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,79515 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3265 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0888 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3265 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,035 




HUF


Hungarian forint


312,37 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3884 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5178 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,2939 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5228 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4390 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7470 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5949 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5272 




KRW


South Korean won


1 322,63 




ZAR


South African rand


17,1000 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4212 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5305 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 011,14 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6108 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,002 




RUB


Russian rouble


74,0264 




THB


Thai baht


39,669 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,8760 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,0672 




INR


Indian rupee


75,6125 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Information relating to the date of the entry into force of the Cooperation Agreement on Satellite Navigation between the European Union and its Member States and the Kingdom of Norway
Date: 2016-06-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Norway, cooperation agreement (EU), satellite navigation








L_2016155EN.01000101.xml










14.6.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 155/1







Information relating to the date of the entry into force of the Cooperation Agreement on Satellite Navigation between the European Union and its Member States and the Kingdom of Norway

The Cooperation Agreement on Satellite Navigation between the European Union and its Member States and the Kingdom of Norway, signed in Brussels on 22 September 2010, entered into force on 1 April 2016, in accordance with Article 12(1) of the Agreement, as the last notification was deposited on 4 March 2016.