do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-574/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Kozmetika Afrodita v EUIPO — Núñez Martín and Machado Montesinos (KOZMeTIKA AFRODITA) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark KOZMeTIKA AFRODITA — Earlier national word mark EXOTIC AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL and earlier national figurative mark AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016419EN.01004301.xml










14.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 419/43





Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Kozmetika Afrodita v EUIPO — Núñez Martín and Machado Montesinos (KOZMeTIKA AFRODITA)
(Case T-574/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark KOZMeTIKA AFRODITA - Earlier national word mark EXOTIC AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL and earlier national figurative mark AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 419/56)
Language of the case: Slovenian

Parties


Applicant: Kozmetika Afrodita d.o.o. (Rogaška Slatina, Slovenia) (represented by: B. Grešak, lawyer)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Pedro Núñez Martín (Madrid, Spain) and Carmen Guillermina Machado Montesinos (Madrid)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 July 2015 (case R 2577/2014-4) relating to opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, Mr Núñez Martín and Ms Machado Montesinos and, on the other, Kozmetika Afrodita.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Kozmetika Afrodita d.o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 406, 7.12.2015.
Case T-688/16: Action brought on 28 September 2016 — Janssen-Cases v Commission
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: appointment of members, competition (EU), damages, indemnification, mediator, principle of proportionality, right to information, right to justice, worker information








C_2016410EN.01003201.xml










7.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 410/32





Action brought on 28 September 2016 — Janssen-Cases v Commission
(Case T-688/16)
(2016/C 410/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Mercedes Janssen-Cases (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. De Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decisions of the Commission of 15 June 2016 to fill the post of the Commission’s mediator by the appointment of another candidate and those rejecting the applicant’s application for that post;










—


Order the Commission to pay the applicant the sum of one hundred thousand euros as compensation for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary harm suffered;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 6(3) of Commission Decision C (2002) 601 of 4 March 2002 on the reinforced Mediation Service, since the contested decisions were adopted by the Commission, while its President is alone competent to adopt those decisions, on a proposal from the Director General of the Human Resources and Security Directorate General following an opinion of the Staff Committee.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which establishes the workers’ right to information and consultation, in the present case the right to actual consultation of the Commission staff committee.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging an abuse of power by the Commission in the procedures implemented in order to fill the post of the Commission’s mediator.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the obligation to state reasons, a manifest error of assessment, infringement of the principles of legitimate expectations, proportionality and sound administration.
Call for proposals under the annual work programme for 2016 for a multi-sectoral call for proposals under the Connecting Europe Facility (Commission Decision C(2016) 1778)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, energy industry, financial aid, invitation to tender, trans-European network, transport infrastructure








C_2016355EN.01000401.xml










28.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/4





Call for proposals under the annual work programme for 2016 for a multi-sectoral call for proposals under the Connecting Europe Facility
(Commission Decision C(2016) 1778)
(2016/C 355/04)
The European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport and Directorate-General for Energy, is hereby launching a call for proposals in order to award grants in accordance with the priorities and objectives defined in the annual work programme for 2016 for a multi-sectoral call for proposals under the Connecting Europe Facility.
Proposals are invited for the following call:






 


CEF-Synergy-2016-1




The indicative amount available for the selected proposals under this call for proposals is EUR 40 million.
The deadline for the submission of proposals is 13 December 2016.

The complete text of the call for proposals is available on:
https://ec.europa.eu/inea/en/connecting-europe-facility/2016-cef-synergy-call
Case T-129/15 and T-130/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Intesa Sanpaolo v EUIPO (WAVE 2 PAY and WAVE TO PAY) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word marks WAVE 2 PAY and WAVE TO PAY — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic banking, electronic money, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016419EN.01003801.xml










14.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 419/38





Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Intesa Sanpaolo v EUIPO (WAVE 2 PAY and WAVE TO PAY)
(Case T-129/15 and T-130/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU word marks WAVE 2 PAY and WAVE TO PAY - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2016/C 419/48)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Intesa Sanpaolo SpA (Turin, Italy) (represented by: P. Pozzi and F. Cecchi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: initially P. Bullock and L. Rampini, then L. Rampini, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against two decisions of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 January 2015 (Cases, respectively, R 1857/2014-5 and R 1864/2014-5), concerning two applications for registration of the word signs, respectively, WAVE 2 PAY and WAVE TO PAY as EU trade marks.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders Intesa Sanpaolo SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 155, 2.7.2015.
Decision No 1/2016 of the Joint Committee of the Regional Convention on Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Preferential Rules of Origin of 28 September 2016 as regards the request of Georgia to become a Contracting Party to the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin [2016/2126]
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: Joint Committee
Subjects: Georgia, accession to an agreement, international convention, originating product, preferential agreement








L_2016329EN.01011801.xml










3.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 329/118








            DECISION No 1/2016 OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONAL CONVENTION ON PAN-EURO-MEDITERRANEAN PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN
         
of 28 September 2016
         
as regards the request of Georgia to become a Contracting Party to the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin [2016/2126]


THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin (1), hereafter ‘the Convention’,

Whereas:







(1)


Article 5(1) of the Convention provides that a third party may become a Contracting Party to the Convention provided that the candidate country or territory has a free trade agreement in force, providing for preferential rules of origin, with at least one of the Contracting Parties.












(2)


Georgia submitted a written request for accession to the Convention to the depositary of the Convention on 23 September 2015.












(3)


Georgia has a free trade agreement in force with two Contracting Parties to the Convention and complies with the condition set out in Article 5(1) of the Convention to become a Contracting Party.












(4)


Article 4(3)(b) of the Convention provides that the Joint Committee shall adopt by decision invitations to third parties to accede to the Convention.





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Georgia shall be invited to accede to the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules of origin.


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




Done at Brussels, 28 September 2016.


For the Joint Committee


The Chair

Péter KOVÀCS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 54, 26.2.2013, p. 4.
Case T-476/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — European Food v EUIPO — Société des produits Nestlé (FITNESS) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark FITNESS — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c), Article 52(1)(a) and Article 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Rule 37(b)(iv) and Rule 50(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal flakes, confectionery product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016410EN.01001702.xml










7.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 410/17





Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — European Food v EUIPO — Société des produits Nestlé (FITNESS)
(Case T-476/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark FITNESS - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c), Article 52(1)(a) and Article 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 37(b)(iv) and Rule 50(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal))
(2016/C 410/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Food SA (Drăgănești, Romania) (represented by: I. Speciac, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, A. Lambrecht and S. Cobet-Nüse, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 June 2015 (Case R 2542/2013-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between European Food and Société des produits Nestlé.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 19 June 2015 (Case R 2542/2013-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between European Food SA and Société des produits Nestlé SA;










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by European Food;










3.


Orders Société des produits Nestlé to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
Case T-575/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Kozmetika Afrodita v EUIPO — Núñez Martín and Machado Montesinos (AFRODITA COSMETICS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark AFRODITA COSMETICS — Earlier national word mark EXOTIC AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL and earlier national figurative mark AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016419EN.01004302.xml










14.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 419/43





Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Kozmetika Afrodita v EUIPO — Núñez Martín and Machado Montesinos (AFRODITA COSMETICS)
(Case T-575/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark AFRODITA COSMETICS - Earlier national word mark EXOTIC AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL and earlier national figurative mark AFRODITA MYSTIC MUSK OIL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2016/C 419/57)
Language of the case: Slovenian

Parties


Applicant: Kozmetika Afrodita d.o.o. (Rogaška Slatina, Slovenia) (represented by: B. Grešak, lawyer)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Pedro Núñez Martín (Madrid, Spain) and Carmen Guillermina Machado Montesinos (Madrid)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 July 2015 (case R 2578/2014-4) relating to opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, Mr Núñez Martín and Ms Machado Montesinos and, on the other, Kozmetika Afrodita.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Kozmetika Afrodita d.o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 406, 7.12.2015.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU waters, English Channel, France, catch area, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing








C_2016355EN.01000301.xml










28.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/3





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2016/C 355/03)
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


12.9.2016




Duration


12.9.2016-31.12.2016




Member State


France




Stock or Group of stocks


RJU/07D.




Species


Undulate ray (Raja undulata)




Zone


Union waters of VIId




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


31/TQ72






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Case T-437/14: Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — United Kingdom v Commission (EAGGF, Guarantee Section — EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Integrated administration and control system — Reductions and exclusions where the rules on cross-compliance are not observed — Flat-rate financial correction imposed by the Commission in accordance with internal guidelines — Burden of proof — Interpretation of Annexe II to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, EAGGF Guarantee Section, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, financial control, infringement of EU law








C_2016410EN.01001201.xml










7.11.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 410/12





Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — United Kingdom v Commission
(Case T-437/14) (1)

((EAGGF, Guarantee Section - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Integrated administration and control system - Reductions and exclusions where the rules on cross-compliance are not observed - Flat-rate financial correction imposed by the Commission in accordance with internal guidelines - Burden of proof - Interpretation of Annexe II to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009))
(2016/C 410/14)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: M. Holt and J. Kraehling, acting as Agents, and V. Wakefield, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Skelly and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman and B. Koopman, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of nine entries from the Annex to Commission Implementing Decision 2014/191/EU of 4 April 2014 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2014 L 104, p. 43), insofar as concerns the item, in the Annex to the decision, relating to the financial corrections applied to expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Scotland during the financial years 2008, 2009 and 2010 totalling EUR 5 606 459,48 because that expenditure did not comply with EU rules.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016355EN.01000201.xml










28.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

27 September 2016
(2016/C 355/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1220 




JPY


Japanese yen


112,52 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4501 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86413 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6213 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0880 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,1108 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,025 




HUF


Hungarian forint


306,94 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2887 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4483 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,3424 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4661 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4873 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7005 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5388 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5255 




KRW


South Korean won


1 232,69 




ZAR


South African rand


15,2031 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4826 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5050 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 511,95 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6355 




PHP


Philippine peso


54,235 




RUB


Russian rouble


71,7263 




THB


Thai baht


38,810 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,6215 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,9250 




INR


Indian rupee


74,5795 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-438/15: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 September 2016 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Taranto — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Davide Durante (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Cour of Justice — Identical questions referred — Articles 49 and 56 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Gambling — Restrictions — Overriding reasons relating to the public interest — Proportionality — Conditions taking part in a tendering procedure and evaluation of economic and financial capacity — Tenderer excluded for failure to produce testimonials of his economic and financial capacity given by two separate banking institutions)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, financial solvency, freedom to provide services, game of chance, invitation to tender, national law, principle of proportionality, right of establishment, service concession, tendering








C_2016454EN.01001002.xml










5.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 454/10






Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 September 2016 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Taranto — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Davide Durante
(Case C-438/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Cour of Justice - Identical questions referred - Articles 49 and 56 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Gambling - Restrictions - Overriding reasons relating to the public interest - Proportionality - Conditions taking part in a tendering procedure and evaluation of economic and financial capacity - Tenderer excluded for failure to produce testimonials of his economic and financial capacity given by two separate banking institutions))
(2016/C 454/21)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Taranto

Criminal proceedings against

Davide Durante

Operative part of the order

Articles 49 and 56 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, that requires operators desiring to respond to a call for tenders for the award of licences in the field of betting and gambling to produce evidence of their economic and financial capacity by means of declarations made by at least two banking establishments and does not allow that capacity to be demonstrated otherwise, provided that that provision is capable of satisfying the conditions of proportionality laid down by the Court’s case-law, which it is for the court making the reference to ascertain.


(1)  OJ C 381, 16.11.2015.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8182 — PAI Partners/RP Group) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-09-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, hotel industry, merger control, travel agency








C_2016355EN.01000101.xml










28.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8182 — PAI Partners/RP Group)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 355/01)
On 22 September 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 the 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 32016M8182. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.