do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-474/15: Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 –GGP Italy v Commission (Protection of the health and safety of consumers and workers — Directive 2006/42/EC — Safeguard clause — National measure of withdrawal from the market and prohibition of placing on the market of a lawn mower — Requirements concerning protective devices — Successive versions of a harmonised standard — Legal certainty — Commission Decision declaring the measure justified — Error of law)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European standard, Latvia, consumer protection, machinery, market approval, principle of legal certainty, protective clause, safety device, safety standard, withdrawal from the market








C_2017078EN.01002501.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/25





Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 –GGP Italy v Commission
(Case T-474/15) (1)

((Protection of the health and safety of consumers and workers - Directive 2006/42/EC - Safeguard clause - National measure of withdrawal from the market and prohibition of placing on the market of a lawn mower - Requirements concerning protective devices - Successive versions of a harmonised standard - Legal certainty - Commission Decision declaring the measure justified - Error of law))
(2017/C 078/33)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Global Garden Products Italy SpA (GGP Italy) (Castelfranco Veneto, Italy) (represented by: A. Villani, L. D’Amario and M. Caccialanza, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by G. Braga da Cruz and L. Cappelletti, and subsequently by G. Braga da Cruz and C. Zadra, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Latvia (represented by: I. Kalniņš and D. Pelše, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/902 of 10 June 2015 on a measure taken by Latvia in accordance with Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council to prohibit the placing on the market of a lawn mower manufactured by GGP Italy SpA (OJ 2015 L 147, p. 22).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/902 of 10 June 2015 on a measure taken by Latvia in accordance with Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council to prohibit the placing on the market of a lawnmower manufactured by GGP Italy SpA;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Global Garden Products Italy SpA (GGP Italy) in the present proceedings and in the interlocutory proceedings;










4.


Orders the Republic of Latvia to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 5.10.2015.
Case C-637/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Laufen Austria AG v European Commission (Appeal — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Article 23(2) — Ceiling of 10 % of turnover — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of equal treatment — Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, equal treatment, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000702.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/7





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Laufen Austria AG v European Commission
(Case C-637/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Article 23(2) - Ceiling of 10 % of turnover - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of equal treatment - Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction))
(2017/C 104/12)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Laufen Austria AG (represented by: E. Navarro Varona, abogada)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castilla Contreras, F. Castillo de la Torre and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 September 2013, Laufen Austria v Commission (T-411/10, EU:T:2013:443);










2.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for it to give judgment on the claim made by Laufen Austria AG for reduction of the fine imposed;










3.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.
Case C-642/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch Belgium v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area — Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information — Single infringement — Proof — Fines — Unlimited jurisdiction — Reasonable time — Proportionality)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, principle of proportionality, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000802.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/8





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch Belgium v European Commission
(Case C-642/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area - Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information - Single infringement - Proof - Fines - Unlimited jurisdiction - Reasonable time - Proportionality))
(2017/C 104/14)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Appellant: Villeroy & Boch Belgium (represented by: O.W. Brouwer and N. Lorjé, advocaten)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Malferrari and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Villeroy & Boch Belgium SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 45, 15.2.2014.
Case T-700/14: Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — TV1 v Commission (Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Supply of integrated audiovisual production, dissemination and archiving services — Rejection of the tender of one tenderer — Contract awarded to another tenderer — Offer abnormally low — Obligation to request further clarification — Obligation to state reasons — Transparency — Equal treatment and non-discrimination — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, provision of services, services contract, tendering, transparency in decision-making








C_2017078EN.01001901.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/19





Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — TV1 v Commission
(Case T-700/14) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Supply of integrated audiovisual production, dissemination and archiving services - Rejection of the tender of one tenderer - Contract awarded to another tenderer - Offer abnormally low - Obligation to request further clarification - Obligation to state reasons - Transparency - Equal treatment and non-discrimination - Manifest error of assessment))
(2017/C 078/25)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: TV1 GmbH (Unterföhring, Germany) (represented by: C. Scherer–Leydecker, J. Mey and A. Rausch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Moro and M. Noll-Ehlers initially, then F. Moro and T. Maxian Rusche and, lastly, T. Maxian Rusche and A. Katsimerou, Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant for Lot No. 4, entitled ‘streaming, compression, hosting and content delivery’ in the call for tenders bearing reference PO/2014 — 03/A4 and concerning ‘[i]ntegrated audiovisual production, dissemination and archiving services’, of the decision by which the Commission awarded that lot to the successful tenderer and of the contract for the supply of services concluded between the Commission and the successful tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders TV1 GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.
Case C-613/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — European Commission v Keramag Keramische Werke GmbH, formerly Keramag Keramische Werke AG and Others (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, trade information








C_2017104EN.01000302.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/3





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — European Commission v Keramag Keramische Werke GmbH, formerly Keramag Keramische Werke AG and Others
(Case C-613/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 104/05)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, F. Ronkes Agerbeek and J. Norris-Usher, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Keramag Keramische Werke GmbH, formerly Keramag Keramische Werke AG, Koralle Sanitärprodukte GmbH, Koninklijke Sphinx BV, Allia SAS, Produits Céramiques de Touraine SA, Pozzi Ginori SpA, Sanitec Europe Oy (represented by: J. Killick, Barrister, P. Lindfelt, advokat, and K. Struckmann, Rechtsanwalt)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside points 1 and 2 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 September 2013, Keramag Keramische Werke and Others v Commission (T-379/10 and T-381/10, EU:T:2013:457);










2.


Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;










3.


Dismisses the cross-appeal;










4.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union as regards the part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 16 September 2013, Keramag Keramische Werke and Others v Commission (T-379/10 and T-381/10, EU:T:2013:457) set aside by the present judgment;










5.


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.
Case C-42/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte costituzionale (Italy) lodged on 26 January 2017 — M.A.S., M.B.
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, criminal law, fraud, fraud against the EU, human rights, legality, limitation of legal proceedings, national law








C_2017195EN.01001001.xml










19.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/10





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte costituzionale (Italy) lodged on 26 January 2017 — M.A.S., M.B.
(Case C-42/17)
(2017/C 195/14)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte costituzionale

Parties to the main proceedings

M.A.S., M.B.

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 325(1) and (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to be interpreted as requiring the criminal court to disapply national legislation on limitation periods which precludes, in a significant number of cases, the punishment of serious fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union, or which imposes shorter limitation periods for fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union than for fraud affecting the financial interests of the State, even where there is no sufficiently precise legal basis for such disapplication?










2.


Is Article 325(1) and (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to be interpreted as requiring the criminal court to disapply national legislation on limitation periods which precludes, in a significant number of cases, the punishment of serious fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union, or which imposes shorter limitation periods for fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union than for fraud affecting the financial interests of the State, even where, in the legal system of the Member State concerned, limitation periods form part of substantive criminal law and are subject to the principle of the legality of criminal proceedings?










3.


Is the judgment of the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 8 September 2015 in Case C-104/15, Taricco, to be interpreted as requiring the criminal court to disapply national legislation on limitation periods which precludes, in a significant number of cases, the punishment of serious fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union, or which imposes shorter limitation periods for fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union than for fraud affecting the financial interests of the State, even where such disapplication is at variance with the overriding principles of the constitution of the Member State concerned or with the inalienable rights of the individual conferred by the constitution of the Member State?
Case T-47/17: Action brought on 26 January 2017 — Yotrio Group v EUIPO (Affixing a green ring on a leg)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, metal furniture, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017095EN.01001801.xml










27.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 95/18





Action brought on 26 January 2017 — Yotrio Group v EUIPO (Affixing a green ring on a leg)
(Case T-47/17)
(2017/C 095/28)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Yotrio Group Co. Ltd (Linhai City, China) (represented by: L. Ullmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Other EU trade mark (Affixing a green ring on a leg) — Application for registration No 14 396 568

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 November 2016 in Case R 285/2016-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-636/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Roca Sanitario, SA v European Commission (Appeal — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of equal treatment — Proportionality — Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cartel, domestic market, equal treatment, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, principle of proportionality, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000701.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/7





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Roca Sanitario, SA v European Commission
(Case C-636/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of equal treatment - Proportionality - Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction))
(2017/C 104/11)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Roca Sanitario, SA (represented by: J. Folguera Crespo, P. Vidal Martínez and E. Navarro Varona, abogados)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castilla Contreras, F. Castillo de la Torre and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Roca Sanitario SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.
Case C-609/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Duravit AG, Duravit SA, Duravit BeLux SPRL/BVBA v European Commission, Council of the European Union (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Article 31 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, trade information








C_2017104EN.01000202.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/2





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Duravit AG, Duravit SA, Duravit BeLux SPRL/BVBA v European Commission, Council of the European Union
(Case C-609/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Article 31 - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 104/03)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellants: Duravit AG, Duravit SA, Duravit BeLux SPRL/BVBA (represented by: U. Soltész and C. von Köckritz, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and L. Malferrari, acting as Agents, and by A. Böhlke, Rechtsanwalt), Council of the European Union

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Duravit AG, Duravit SA and Duravit BeLux SPRL/BVBA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 71, 8.3.2014.
Case C-626/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch Austria GmbH v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area — Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information — Single infringement — Proof — Fines — Unlimited jurisdiction — Reasonable time — Proportionality)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, principle of proportionality, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000602.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/6





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch Austria GmbH v European Commission
(Case C-626/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area - Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information - Single infringement - Proof - Fines - Unlimited jurisdiction - Reasonable time - Proportionality))
(2017/C 104/10)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Villeroy & Boch Austria GmbH (represented by: A. Reidlinger and J. Weichbrodt, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Kellerbauer, L. Malferrari and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Villeroy & Boch Austria GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
Case C-614/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Masco Corp. and Others v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — Single and continuous infringement — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, trade information








C_2017104EN.01000401.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/4





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Masco Corp. and Others v European Commission
(Case C-614/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - Single and continuous infringement - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 104/06)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellants: Masco Corp., Hansgrohe AG, Hansgrohe Deutschland Vertriebs GmbH, Hansgrohe Handelsgesellschaft mbH, Hansgrohe SA/NV, Hansgrohe BV, Hansgrohe SARL, Hansgrohe Srl, Hüppe GmbH, Hüppe GesmbH, Hüppe Belgium SA/NV, Hüppe BV (represented by: D. Schroeder and S. Heinz, Rechtsanwälte, and by B. Fischer, advocate, instructed by J. Temple Lang, Solicitor)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Malferrari and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents, and by B. Kennelly, Barrister)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Masco Corp., Hansgrohe AG, Hansgrohe Deutschland Vertriebs GmbH, Hansgrohe Handelsgesellschaft mbH, Hansgrohe SA/NV, Hansgrohe BV, Hansgrohe SARL, Hansgrohe Srl, Hüppe GmbH, Hüppe GesmbH, Hüppe Belgium SA/NV and Hüppe BV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.