do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-450/16 P: Appeal brought on 11 August 2016 (fax of 4 August) by U-R LAB against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 25 May 2016 in Joined Cases T-422/15 and T-423/15 U-R LAB v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Date: 2016-08-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, catering industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017070EN.01000801.xml










6.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 70/8





Appeal brought on 11 August 2016 (fax of 4 August) by U-R LAB against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 25 May 2016 in Joined Cases T-422/15 and T-423/15 U-R LAB v European Union Intellectual Property Office

(Case C-450/16 P)
(2017/C 070/12)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: U-R LAB (represented by: A. Rudoni, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 25 November 2016 the Court (Tenth Chamber) dismissed the appeal.
Case C-447/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 11 August 2016 — Roland Becker v Hainan Airlines Co. Ltd.
Date: 2016-08-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airline, airport, carriage of passengers, indemnification, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU








C_2016428EN.01000501.xml










21.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 428/5





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 11 August 2016 — Roland Becker v Hainan Airlines Co. Ltd.
(Case C-447/16)
(2016/C 428/06)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Roland Becker

Defendant: Hainan Airlines Co. Ltd

Question referred

Where passengers are transported on two flights without any significant stopover at the connecting airports, is the place of departure of the first leg of the journey to be regarded as being the place where the services were provided under the second indent of Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, (1) even when the claim advanced in the application for compensation under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (2) is based on a disruption to the second leg of the journey and the action is brought against the party to the contract of carriage, which, although it was the operating air carrier for the second flight, was not the operating air carrier for the first flight?


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1).

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).