do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-51/15: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Celle — Germany) — Remondis GmbH & Co. KG Region Nord v Region Hannover (References for a preliminary ruling — Article 4(2) TEU — Respect for the national identity of Member States inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government — Internal organisation of the Member States — Regional authorities — Legal instrument creating a new public-law entity and organising the transfer of powers and responsibilities for the performance of public tasks — Public procurement — Directive 2004/18/EC — Article 1(2)(a) — Concept of ‘public contract’)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative unit, national identity, public contract, regional authority, regional government








C_2017053EN.01000501.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/5





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Celle — Germany) — Remondis GmbH & Co. KG Region Nord v Region Hannover
(Case C-51/15) (1)

((References for a preliminary ruling - Article 4(2) TEU - Respect for the national identity of Member States inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government - Internal organisation of the Member States - Regional authorities - Legal instrument creating a new public-law entity and organising the transfer of powers and responsibilities for the performance of public tasks - Public procurement - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 1(2)(a) - Concept of ‘public contract’))
(2017/C 053/06)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Celle

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Remondis GmbH & Co. KG Region Nord

Defendant: Region Hannover

Intervening parties: Zweckverband Abfallwirtschaft Region Hannover

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(2)(a) of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts must be interpreted as meaning that an agreement concluded by two regional authorities, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, on the basis of which they adopt constituent statutes forming a special-purpose association with legal personality governed by public law and transfer to that new public entity certain competences previously held by those authorities and henceforth belonging to that special-purpose association, does not constitute a ‘public contract’.
However, such a transfer of competences concerning the performance of public tasks exists only if it concerns both the responsibilities associated with the transferred competence and the powers that are the corollary thereof, so that the newly competent public authority has decision-making and financial autonomy, which it is for the referring court to verify.


(1)  OJ C 155, 11.5.2015.
Case C-654/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — Länsförsäkringar AB v Matek A/S (Reference for a preliminary ruling — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 9(1)(b) — Article 15(1) — Article 51(1)(a) — Extent of the exclusive right granted to the proprietor — Period of five years following registration)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017053EN.01001802.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/18





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen — Sweden) — Länsförsäkringar AB v Matek A/S
(Case C-654/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 9(1)(b) - Article 15(1) - Article 51(1)(a) - Extent of the exclusive right granted to the proprietor - Period of five years following registration))
(2017/C 053/22)
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Länsförsäkringar AB

Defendant: Matek A/S

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the [European Union] trade mark, read in conjunction with Articles 15(1) and 51(1)(a) of that regulation, must be interpreted as meaning that, during the period of five years following registration of an EU trade mark, its proprietor may, if there is a likelihood of confusion, prevent third parties from using in the course of trade a sign identical or similar to his mark in respect of all goods and services identical or similar to those for which that mark has been registered without having to demonstrate genuine use of that mark in respect of those goods or services.


(1)  OJ C 48, 8.2.2016.
Case C-618/15: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Concurrence SARL v Samsung Electronics France SAS, Amazon Services Europe Sàrl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Jurisdiction — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Selective distribution network — Prohibition on online resale outside a network — Action for an injunction prohibiting unlawful interference — Connecting factor)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: distributive trades, electronic commerce, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, market approval








C_2017053EN.01001801.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/18





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Concurrence SARL v Samsung Electronics France SAS, Amazon Services Europe Sàrl
(Case C-618/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Jurisdiction - Tort, delict or quasi-delict - Selective distribution network - Prohibition on online resale outside a network - Action for an injunction prohibiting unlawful interference - Connecting factor))
(2017/C 053/21)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Concurrence SARL

Defendants: Samsung Electronics France SAS, Amazon Services Europe Sàrl

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted, for the purpose of conferring the jurisdiction given by that provision to hear an action to establish liability for infringement of the prohibition on resale outside a selective distribution network resulting from offers, on websites operated in various Member States, of products covered by that network, as meaning that the place where the damage occurred is to be regarded as the territory of the Member State which protects the prohibition on resale by means of the action at issue, a territory on which the appellant alleges to have suffered a reduction in its sales.


(1)  OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
Case T-900/16: Action brought on 21 December 2016 — Casual Dreams v EUIPO — López Fernández (Dayaday)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic equipment, office supplies, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2017095EN.01001202.xml










27.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/12





Action brought on 21 December 2016 — Casual Dreams v EUIPO — López Fernández (Dayaday)
(Case T-900/16)
(2017/C 095/21)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Casual Dreams, SLU (Manresa, Spain) (represented by: A. Tarí Lázaro, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Miguel Ángel López Fernández (Fuensalida, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word element ‘Dayaday’ — Application for registration No 13 243 563

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 November 2016 in Case R 375/2016-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Decision of the Second Board of Appeal adopted on 6 October 2016 in Case R 375/2016-2 dismissing in part the appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO No B 2 469 545 of 17 December 2015;










—


dismiss the application for registration of the EU trademark No 13 243 563 filed by the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal for all the goods in Class 9 and the portion of the goods in Classes 16 and 24 in respect of which the Second Board of Appeal has dismissed the appeal;










—


in the alternative, partially annul the contested decision, pursuant to Article 8(5) (EUTMR), in so far as it confirms the dismissal of the opposition and the appeal in respect of the goods in Classes 9, 16 and 24 and refer the matter back to the Board of Appeal for review in its entirety in respect of the relative ground referred to in the abovementioned article;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: claim, cross-border cooperation, exchange of information, financial solvency, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, judicial proceedings, liquidation, mutual recognition principle




L_2016349EN.01000901.xml










21.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 349/9







Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 141 of 5 June 2015
)

On page 56, Article 84(1):
for:


‘1.   The provisions of this Regulation shall apply only to insolvency proceedings opened after 26 June 2017. Acts committed by a debtor before that date shall continue to be governed by the law which was applicable to them at the time they were committed.’,


read:


‘1.   The provisions of this Regulation shall apply only to insolvency proceedings opened from 26 June 2017. Acts committed by a debtor before that date shall continue to be governed by the law which was applicable to them at the time they were committed.’.
Case C-524/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2016 — European Commission v Hansestadt Lübeck, successor in law to Flughafen Lübeck GmbH (Appeal — State aid — Airport charges — Article 108(2) TFEU — Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU — Decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure — Admissibility of an action for annulment — Person individually concerned — Legal interest in bringing proceedings — Article 107(1) TFEU — Condition relating to selectivity)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State aid, admissibility, airport, charges for use of infrastructure, control of State aid








C_2017053EN.01000301.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/3





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2016 — European Commission v Hansestadt Lübeck, successor in law to Flughafen Lübeck GmbH
(Case C-524/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - State aid - Airport charges - Article 108(2) TFEU - Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - Decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure - Admissibility of an action for annulment - Person individually concerned - Legal interest in bringing proceedings - Article 107(1) TFEU - Condition relating to selectivity))
(2017/C 053/03)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche, R. Sauer and V. Di Bucci, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Hansestadt Lübeck, successor in law to Flughafen Lübeck GmbH (represented by: M. Núñez Müller and I. Ruck, Rechtsanwälte)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and K. Petersen, Agents), Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M.A. Sampol Pucurull, Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Hansestadt Lübeck;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of Spain to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ 26, 26.1.2015.
Case C-539/15: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Daniel Bowman v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Directive 2000/78/EC — Equal treatment in employment and occupation — Article 2(1) and (2) — Discrimination on grounds of age — Collective labour agreement — Extension of the period of advancement from the first to the second step in the salary scale — Indirect unequal treatment on grounds of age)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: age discrimination, collective agreement, equal treatment, pay, pay scale, promotion, school attendance, work contract








C_2017053EN.01001602.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/16





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Daniel Bowman v Pensionsversicherungsanstalt
(Case C-539/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Directive 2000/78/EC - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Article 2(1) and (2) - Discrimination on grounds of age - Collective labour agreement - Extension of the period of advancement from the first to the second step in the salary scale - Indirect unequal treatment on grounds of age))
(2017/C 053/19)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Daniel Bowman

Defendant: Pensionsversicherungsanstalt

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1) and (2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation must be interpreted as not precluding a national collective labour agreement, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, by which an employee who benefits from account being taken of periods of school education for the purpose of his classification in the salary steps is subject to a longer period of advancement between the first and second salary step, as long as that extension applies to every employee benefiting from the inclusion of those periods, including retroactively to those having already reached the next steps.


(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
Joined Cases C-154/15, C-307/15 and C-308/15: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Granada, Audiencia Provincial de Alicante — Spain) — Francisco Gutiérrez Naranjo v Cajasur Banco SAU (C-154/15), Ana María Palacios Martínez v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA (BBVA) (C-307/15), Banco Popular Español, SA v Emilio Irles López, Teresa Torres Andreu (C-308/15) (References for a preliminary ruling — Directive 93/13/EEC — Consumer contracts — Mortgage loans — Unfair terms — Article 4(2) — Article 6(1) — Declaration of nullity — Limitation by the national court of the temporal effects of the declaration of nullity of an unfair term)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer price, consumer protection, unfair terms of contract








C_2017053EN.01000802.xml










20.2.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/8





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2016 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Granada, Audiencia Provincial de Alicante — Spain) — Francisco Gutiérrez Naranjo v Cajasur Banco SAU (C-154/15), Ana María Palacios Martínez v Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA (BBVA) (C-307/15), Banco Popular Español, SA v Emilio Irles López, Teresa Torres Andreu (C-308/15)
(Joined Cases C-154/15, C-307/15 and C-308/15) (1)

((References for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Consumer contracts - Mortgage loans - Unfair terms - Article 4(2) - Article 6(1) - Declaration of nullity - Limitation by the national court of the temporal effects of the declaration of nullity of an unfair term))
(2017/C 053/10)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Granada, Audiencia Provincial de Alicante

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Francisco Gutiérrez Naranjo (C-154/15), Ana María Palacios Martínez (C-307/15), Banco Popular Español, SA (C-308/15)

Defendants: Cajasur Banco SAU (C-154/15), Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA (BBVA) (C-307/15), Emilio Irles López, Teresa Torres Andreu (C-308/15)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as precluding national case-law that temporally limits the restitutory effects connected with a finding of unfairness by a court, in accordance with Article 3(1) of that directive, in respect of a clause contained in a contract concluded between a consumer and a seller or supplier, to amounts overpaid under such a clause after the delivery of the decision in which the finding of unfairness is made.


(1)  OJ C 228, 13.7.2015.

OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, EU waters, Spain, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing








C_2016477EN.01000301.xml










21.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 477/3





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2016/C 477/04)
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


5.12.2016




Duration


5.12.2016-31.12.2016




Member State


Spain




Stock or Group of stocks


RJU/8-C.




Species


Undulate ray (Raja undulata)




Zone


Union waters of VIII




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


41/TQ72






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.
Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on improving securities settlement in the European Union and on central securities depositories and amending Directives 98/26/EC and 2014/65/EU and Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 (OJ L 257, 28.8.2014)
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: financial control, financial institution, financial instrument, financial legislation, financial transaction, liquidity control, sales agent, securities








L_2016349EN.01000801.xml










21.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 349/8







Corrigendum to Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on improving securities settlement in the European Union and on central securities depositories and amending Directives 98/26/EC and 2014/65/EU and Regulation (EU) No 236/2012
(
Official Journal of the European Union L 257 of 28 August 2014
)

On page 56, Article 54(8), third subparagraph:
for:

‘Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.’,

read:

‘Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.’
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2016-12-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, EU waters, France, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing








C_2016477EN.01000302.xml










21.12.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 477/3





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2016/C 477/05)
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


14.11.2016




Duration


14.11.2016-31.12.2016




Member State


France




Stock or Group of stocks


PLE/7HJK.




Species


Plaice (Pleuronectes platessa)




Zone


VIIh, VIIj and VIIk




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


37/TQ72






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.