do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-70/14 DISS: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — Simon v Commission (Civil Service — Officials — Pensions — Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations — Pension rights acquired before entering the service of the European Union under a national pension scheme — Transfer to the EU pension scheme — Proposal concerning additional pensionable years — Concept of a measure having an adverse effect — Manifest inadmissibility — Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, staff regulations (EU), transfer of pension rights








C_2016364EN.01005101.xml










3.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 364/51






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — Simon v Commission
(Case F-70/14 DISS) (1)

((Civil Service - Officials - Pensions - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Pension rights acquired before entering the service of the European Union under a national pension scheme - Transfer to the EU pension scheme - Proposal concerning additional pensionable years - Concept of a measure having an adverse effect - Manifest inadmissibility - Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure))
(2016/C 364/65)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Anne-Claire Simon (Brussels, Belgium) (represented initially by: D. de Abreu Caldas, M. de Abreu Caldas and J.-N. Louis, lawyers, and subsequently by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, subsequently by: G. Gattinara, acting as Agent, and lastly by: G. Gattinara and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents)

Subject matter of the case

Application for annulment of the decision concerning the transfer of the applicant’s pension rights to the European Union pension scheme which applies the new General Implementing Provisions (GIPs) of 3 March 2011 for Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations and, in the alternative, an application seeking an order that the Commission compensate the applicant for the harm resulting from the excessively long period taken to deal with her transfer application.

Operative part of the order







1)


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2)


Anne-Claire Simon is to bear her own costs and is ordered to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 388, 3.11.2014, p. 28.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016265EN.01000201.xml










21.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 265/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

20 July 2016
(2016/C 265/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1013 




JPY


Japanese yen


117,33 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4384 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83605 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,4684 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0882 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3552 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,022 




HUF


Hungarian forint


315,05 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3758 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4741 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,3463 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4712 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4382 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5405 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5658 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4962 




KRW


South Korean won


1 257,06 




ZAR


South African rand


15,7296 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3501 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4855 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 433,83 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,4456 




PHP


Philippine peso


51,917 




RUB


Russian rouble


69,7877 




THB


Thai baht


38,583 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,5761 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,3683 




INR


Indian rupee


74,0123 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case F-1/16: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — WQ (*) v Parliament (Civil service — Officials — Certification procedure — 2014 period — Applicant not included on the list of officials selected to participate in the training programme — Article 45a of the Staff Regulations)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, in-service training, staff regulations (EU)




C_2016364EN.01004102.xml










3.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 364/41






Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 21 July 2016 —  WQ (*1) v Parliament
(Case F-1/16) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Certification procedure - 2014 period - Applicant not included on the list of officials selected to participate in the training programme - Article 45a of the Staff Regulations))
(2016/C 364/51)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: WQ (*1) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: D. Nessaf and M. Ecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Parliament’s decision not to include the applicant’s name on the list of officials selected to participate in the training programme for the 2014 certification exercise.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders  WQ (*1) to bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament.






(*1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.

(1)  OJ C 111, 29.3.2016, p. 45.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7877 — Warburg Pincus/General Atlantic/Unicredit/Santander/SAM/Pioneer) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bank, economic concentration, financial services, holding company, investment company, merger control








C_2016265EN.01000101.xml










21.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 265/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7877 — Warburg Pincus/General Atlantic/Unicredit/Santander/SAM/Pioneer)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 265/01)
On 26 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 32016M7877. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8141 — Watling Street/Sagemcom) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, mechanical engineering, merger control, telecommunications industry








C_2016265EN.01000401.xml










21.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 265/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8141 — Watling Street/Sagemcom)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 265/05)






1.


On 13 July 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Watling Street Capital Partners LLP (United Kingdom), through its subsidiary Saturn BidCo SAS, acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Sagemcom Holding SAS (France) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Watling Street Capital Partners LLP is the ultimate parent company of the group Charterhouse, which is composed of companies managing investment funds,










—


Sagemcom Holding SAS is the ultimate parent company of the group Sagemcom, which is composed of companies active in the development, production and distribution of added-value communicating terminals, energy management solutions, and telecommunications infrastructure.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in this Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8141 — Watling Street/Sagemcom, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case F-100/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — De Nicola v EIB (Civil Service — EIB staff — Appraisal — 2013 annual staff report — Decision of the Appeals Committee)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, indemnification, promotion, staff assessment








C_2016364EN.01003301.xml










3.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 364/33






Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — De Nicola v EIB
(Case F-100/15) (1)

((Civil Service - EIB staff - Appraisal - 2013 annual staff report - Decision of the Appeals Committee))
(2016/C 364/38)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Carlo De Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: L. Isola and G. Isola, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented initially by: G. Nuvoli and J.-P. Minnaert, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer, and subsequently by: G. Nuvoli and G. Faedo, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Annulment, firstly, of the applicant’s staff report for 2013 and, secondly, the consecutive and connected decisions of the EIB such as the decision not to promote him to grade D and compensation for the non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Carlo De Nicola to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Investment Bank.






(1)  OJ C 414, 14.12.2015, p. 41.
Case C-597/14 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — European Union Intellectual Property Office v Xavier Grau Ferrer, Juan Cándido Rubio Ferrer, Alberto Rubio Ferrer (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 76(2) — Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Rule 50(1), third subparagraph — Figurative mark — Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier trade mark — Proof of the existence, validity and extent of the protection of the earlier trade mark — Consideration by the Board of Appeal of evidence submitted out of time — Rejection of the opposition by the Board of Appeal)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, fruit, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016343EN.01000501.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/5





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — European Union Intellectual Property Office v Xavier Grau Ferrer, Juan Cándido Rubio Ferrer, Alberto Rubio Ferrer
(Case C-597/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 76(2) - Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Rule 50(1), third subparagraph - Figurative mark - Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier trade mark - Proof of the existence, validity and extent of the protection of the earlier trade mark - Consideration by the Board of Appeal of evidence submitted out of time - Rejection of the opposition by the Board of Appeal))
(2016/C 343/06)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Xavier Grau Ferrer, Juan Cándido Rubio Ferrer, Alberto Rubio Ferrer

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal.










2.


Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.
Case C-4/15: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 July 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Argos Supply Trading BV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Customs procedures with economic impact — Outward processing — Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 — Article 148(c) — Issue of authorisation — Economic conditions — Absence of serious harm to the essential interests of Community processors — Concept of ‘Community processors’)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: common customs tariff, customs regulations, customs union, export (EU), outward processing, primary product, processing industry, substitute product








C_2016343EN.01000601.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/6





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 July 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Argos Supply Trading BV
(Case C-4/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - Common Customs Tariff - Customs procedures with economic impact - Outward processing - Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Article 148(c) - Issue of authorisation - Economic conditions - Absence of serious harm to the essential interests of Community processors - Concept of ‘Community processors’))
(2016/C 343/07)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Defendant: Argos Supply Trading BV

Operative part of the judgment

Article 148(c) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of a request for authorisation to use the outward processing procedure, in order to assess whether the economic conditions governing the use of that procedure are satisfied, it is necessary to take account not only of the essential interests of Community producers of products analogous to the finished product resulting from the envisaged processing operations, but also of those of Community producers of products analogous to the basic products or to the intermediate non-EU products intended to be incorporated in the Community goods temporarily exported during those operations.


(1)  OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.
Case C-104/15: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — European Commission v Romania Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Environmental protection — Directive 2006/21/EC — Waste management — Mining — Tailing ponds — Dust re-emission — Fine airborn dust particles — Pollution — Human health — Obligatory preventative measures — Articles 4 and 13 — Finding of infringement
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air quality, dust, environmental protection, mining extraction, pollution control measures, public health, waste management








C_2016343EN.01000602.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/6





Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — European Commission v Romania
(Case C-104/15) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Environmental protection - Directive 2006/21/EC - Waste management - Mining - Tailing ponds - Dust re-emission - Fine airborn dust particles - Pollution - Human health - Obligatory preventative measures - Articles 4 and 13 - Finding of infringement)
(2016/C 343/08)
Language of the case: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Nicolae, E. Sanfrutos Cano and D. Loma-Osorio Lerena, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Romania (represented by: R. H. Radu, E. Gane, A. Buzoianu and R. Haţieganu, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Declares that, by failing to adopt appropriate measures to prevent dust rising from the Boșneag pond — extension, Romania failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4 and Article 13(2) of Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC.










2.


Orders Romania to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 146, 4.5.2015.
Case C-226/15 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — Apple and Pear Australia Ltd, Star Fruits Diffusion v European Union Intellectual Property Office, Carolus C. BVBA (Appeal — EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark English pink — Opposition by the proprietor of the word mark PINK LADY and the figurative marks including the word elements ‘Pink Lady’ — Opposition dismissed — Decision of an EU trade mark court — Alteration — Res judicata)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, fruit-growing, pip fruit, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016343EN.01000701.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/7





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — Apple and Pear Australia Ltd, Star Fruits Diffusion v European Union Intellectual Property Office, Carolus C. BVBA
(Case C-226/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark English pink - Opposition by the proprietor of the word mark PINK LADY and the figurative marks including the word elements ‘Pink Lady’ - Opposition dismissed - Decision of an EU trade mark court - Alteration - Res judicata))
(2016/C 343/09)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellants: Apple and Pear Australia Ltd, Star Fruits Diffusion (represented by: T. de Haan, avocat, and P. Péters, advocaat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, Agent), Carolus C. BVBA

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Apple and Pear Australia Ltd and Star Fruits Diffusion to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 254, 3.8.2015.
Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1178 of 10 June 2016 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on the clearing obligation (OJ L 195, 20.7.2016)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: administrative check, contract, financial instrument, financial legislation, financial transaction, futures market, technical standard








L_2016196EN.01005601.xml










21.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 196/56







Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1178 of 10 June 2016 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on the clearing obligation

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 195 of 20 July 2016
)


On page 8, Article 3(1)(b):
for:







‘(b)


9 July 2017 for counterparties in Category 2;’,





read:







‘(b)


9 August 2017 for counterparties in Category 2;’;





on page 8, Article 3(1)(d):
for:







‘(d)


9 July 2019 for counterparties in Category 4.’,





read:







‘(d)


9 August 2019 for counterparties in Category 4.’;





on page 8, Article 3(2)(a):
for:

               ‘
               9 July 2019 …’,
read:

               ‘
               9 August 2019 …’;
on page 9, Article 4(2)(b):
for:







‘(b)


3 years for contracts entered into or novated 9 October 2016 that belong to the classes in Table 2 set out in Annex I;’,





read:







‘(b)


3 years for contracts entered into or novated before 9 October 2016 that belong to the classes in Table 2 set out in Annex I;’.
Information from the Commission pursuant to Council Decision (EU) 2016/833
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: international convention, international organisation, international transport, rail transport, revision of an agreement, trans-European network, transport of dangerous goods








C_2016265EN.01000301.xml










21.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 265/3





Information from the Commission pursuant to Council Decision (EU) 2016/833
(2016/C 265/04)
Pursuant to Article 2 of Council Decision (EU) 2016/833 of 17 May 2016 establishing the position to be adopted, on behalf of the European Union, at the 54th session of the Committee of Experts for the Carriage of Dangerous Goods set up by the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF) as regards certain amendments to Appendix C to the Convention concerning International Carriage by Rail (1), applicable from 1 January 2017, the Commission informs that the decisions taken at the body are available at:
http://www.otif.org/index.php?id=552&L=2


(1)  OJ L 140, 27.5.2016, p. 12.
Joined Cases C-363/15 P and C-364/15 P: Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office, Nanu-Nana Handelsgesellschaft mbH für Geschenkartikel & Co. KG (Appeal — European Union trade mark — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2016-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016454EN.01001001.xml










5.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 454/10






Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 July 2016 — Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office, Nanu-Nana Handelsgesellschaft mbH für Geschenkartikel & Co. KG
(Joined Cases C-363/15 P and C-364/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - European Union trade mark - No need to adjudicate))
(2016/C 454/20)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Louis Vuitton Malletier SA (represented by: P. Roncaglia, G. Lazzeretti, F. Rossi and N. Parrotta, avvocati)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Bullock and D. Hanf, acting as Agents), Nanu-Nana Handelsgesellschaft mbH für Geschenkartikel & Co. KG (represented by: T. Boddien and A. Nordemann, Rechtsanwälte)

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the appeals.










2.


Nanu-Nana Handelsgesellschaft mbH für Geschenkartikel & Co. KG shall pay its own costs in Case C-363/15 P and Case C-364/15 P.










3.


Louis Vuitton Malletier SA shall bear its own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in Case C-363/15 P and Case C-364/15 P.






(1)  OJ C 414, 14.12.2015.