do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-126/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 10 March 2017 — Orsolya Czakó v ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt.
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, loan, unfair terms of contract








C_2017221EN.01000301.xml










10.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 221/3





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék (Hungary) lodged on 10 March 2017 — Orsolya Czakó v ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt.
(Case C-126/17)
(2017/C 221/04)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Orsolya Czakó

Defendant: ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt.

Questions referred







1.


For the purpose of determining the amount of a loan agreement, does wording, such as that of Clauses I/1 and II/1 of the agreement at issue, which gives CHF 64 731 as an indicative amount, whilst mentioning a maximum amount of HUF 8 280 000 as the financing request, and which links determination of the amount of the loan agreement to a declaration having legal effect made by the party contracting with the consumer and to the data recorded in its books, meet the criteria of plain, intelligible language required by Article 4(2) and Article 5 of Directive 93/13/EEC? (1)











2.


If the determination made in Clauses I/1 and II/1 of the agreement does not correspond to the notion of plain, intelligible language and it is possible to examine whether the terms of those clauses are unfair, in the event that they are considered to be unfair, may the entire agreement be declared invalid, given that, in cases in which the subject matter of the agreement is not definite, the legal consequence under national law is the invalidity of the agreement in its entirety?










3.


In the event that the agreement may be declared valid, can the amount be determined in the manner most favourable to the consumer?






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Case T-157/17: Action brought on 10 March 2017 — Cristalfarma v EUIPO — Novartis (ILLUMINA)
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017129EN.01003702.xml










24.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/37





Action brought on 10 March 2017 — Cristalfarma v EUIPO — Novartis (ILLUMINA)
(Case T-157/17)
(2017/C 129/57)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Cristalfarma Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: R. Almaraz Palmero, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Novartis AG (Basel, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘ILLUMINA’ — Application for registration No 11 934 239

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2017 in Case R 1187/2016-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the other party, should it intervene, to pay the costs of proceedings, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Articles 75, 42(2) and 64(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-160/17: Action brought on 10 March 2017 — RY v Commission
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: full-time employment, right to justice, rights of the defence, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), termination of employment








C_2017144EN.01005501.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/55





Action brought on 10 March 2017 — RY v Commission
(Case T-160/17)
(2017/C 144/74)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: RY (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

Declare and rule:






—


The decision of 27 April 2016 of the Director General of the Human Resources and Security Directorate General (DG HR) terminating the applicant’s contract as a member of the temporary staff concluded for an indefinite period under Article 47(c)(i) of the CEOS is annulled;










—


The European Commission is ordered to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging infringement of the right of the applicant to be heard before the adoption of the decision terminating the applicant’s contract for an indefinite period. According to the applicant, the contested decision was adopted in breach of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. In addition, it was adopted in breach of the obligation to state reasons and, more exactly, of the right of the applicant to be informed of all the objective complaints which underlie the contested decision and, in particular, the reasons for an alleged breakdown in the relationship of trust.
Case C-123/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 10 March 2017 — Nefiye Yön v Landeshauptstadt Stuttgart
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Association Council (EU), EU visa policy, Türkiye, family migration, free movement of workers, married person, migrant worker, migration control








C_2017318EN.01000201.xml










25.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/2





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 10 March 2017 — Nefiye Yön v Landeshauptstadt Stuttgart
(Case C-123/17)
(2017/C 318/02)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Nefiye Yön

Defendant: Landeshauptstadt Stuttgart

Questions referred







1.


Has the standstill clause laid down in Article 7 of Decision No 2/76 of the Association Council been completely superseded by the standstill clause laid down in Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council, or is the lawfulness of new restrictions on the free movement of workers, which were introduced between the entry into force of Decision No 2/76 and the time when Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 became applicable, to continue to be assessed pursuant to Article 7 of Decision No 2/76?










2.


If the answer to the first question is that Article 7 of Decision No 2/76 was not completely replaced: is the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 to be fully applied also to the application of Article 7 of Decision No 2/76, with the result that Article 7 of Decision No 2/76 also covers on that basis a national provision, introduced with effect from 5 October 1980, under which the ability of the spouse of a Turkish worker to join that worker for the purpose of family reunification is made dependent on a national visa being issued?










3.


Is the introduction of such a national provision justified on the basis of an overriding reason in the public interest, in particular the objective of effective immigration control and the management of migration flows, where the particular circumstances of the individual case are taken into account through the operation of a hardship clause?
Case T-165/17: Action brought on 10 March 2017 — Emcur v EUIPO — Emcure Pharmaceuticals (EMCURE)
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cultural event, education, medicine, pharmacology, registered trade mark, research, social services, trade-mark law








C_2017129EN.01003901.xml










24.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/39





Action brought on 10 March 2017 — Emcur v EUIPO — Emcure Pharmaceuticals (EMCURE)
(Case T-165/17)
(2017/C 129/59)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Emcur Gesundheitsmittel aus Bad Ems GmbH (Bad Ems, Germany) (represented by: K. Bröcker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd (Bhosari, India)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘EMCURE’ — Application for registration No 12 269 049

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 December 2016 in Case R 790/2016-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017074EN.01000101.xml










10.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 74/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

9 March 2017
(2017/C 74/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0551 




JPY


Japanese yen


120,95 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4337 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86653 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5525 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0709 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,0458 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021 




HUF


Hungarian forint


311,14 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3171 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5499 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,9603 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4044 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4272 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,1949 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5277 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4986 




KRW


South Korean won


1 222,35 




ZAR


South African rand


13,9979 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2912 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4312 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 135,85 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7002 




PHP


Philippine peso


53,117 




RUB


Russian rouble


62,6102 




THB


Thai baht


37,287 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,3436 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,8770 




INR


Indian rupee


70,3995 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-159/17: Action brought on 10 March 2017 — Claro Sol Cleaning v EUIPO — Solemo (Claro Sol Facility Services desde 1972)
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, business management, cleaning industry, organisation of transport, provision of services, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017195EN.01003002.xml










19.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 195/30





Action brought on 10 March 2017 — Claro Sol Cleaning v EUIPO — Solemo (Claro Sol Facility Services desde 1972)
(Case T-159/17)
(2017/C 195/43)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Claro Sol Cleaning, SLU (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Solemo Oy (Helsinki, Finland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark ‘Claro Sol Facility Services desde 1972’ — Application for registration No 13 318 993

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 January 2017 in Case R 478/2016-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office of 9 January 2017 in Case R 478/2016-1, which partially upheld the appeal filed by Solemo Oy and partially annulled the decision ruling on opposition No. B 2472267, against the European Union trademark application No. 13.318.993 ‘Claro Sol Facility Services desde 1972’ property of the appellant, by virtue of which the said trademark has been entirely rejected in classes 37 and 39 and partially rejected in class 35;










—


grant the application for registration of the European Union trademark No. 13.318.993 ‘Claro Sol Facility Services desde 1972’ for all services covered in classes 35, 37 and 39, due to the lack of existence of likelihood of confusion on the part of the public in the territory in which the earlier national trademark, registered in Finland under No. 250.356 ‘SOL’, property of the intervener, is protected;










—


order the intervener to bear the costs of the procedure.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-130/17: Action brought on 10 March 2017 — European Commission v Republic of Bulgaria
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: area of freedom, security and justice, biometrics, foreign national, identity document, infringement of EU law, personal data, public safety, technical specification








C_2017144EN.01003301.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/33





Action brought on 10 March 2017 — European Commission v Republic of Bulgaria
(Case C-130/17)
(2017/C 144/43)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Wils and I. Zalogin)

Defendant: Republic of Bulgaria

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the Republic of Bulgaria has failed to fulfil its obligations concerning the establishment of a single point of contact for the exchange of electronic certificates for access to biometric data in identity documents in accordance with Commission Decision С(2009) 7476 of 5 October 2009 amending Commission Decision C(2008) 8657 laying down a certificate policy as required in the technical specifications on the standards for security features and biometrics in passports and travel documents issued by Member States and Commission Decision С(2011) 5478 of 4 August 2011 amending Commission Decision C(2002) 3069 laying down the technical specifications for the uniform format for residence permits for third-country nationals;










—


order the Republic of Bulgaria to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The Republic of Bulgaria has failed to establish a single point of contact for the exchange of electronic certificates for access to biometric information in identity documents and has accordingly failed to fulfil its obligations under the abovementioned Commission decisions.
Corrigendum to Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014)
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: Council of the European Union, European Parliament
Subjects: financial control, financial instrument, financial legislation, investment company, management audit, provision of services








L_2017064EN.01011601.xml










10.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 64/116







Corrigendum to Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 173 of 12 June 2014
)


On page 421, first subparagraph of Article 34(9):
for:

‘ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 7.’,

read:

‘ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7.’;

on page 423, first subparagraph of Article 35(12):
for:

‘ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 3, 4, 7 and 10.’,

read:

‘ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 7 and 10.’.
Case C-136/16: Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 10 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça — Portugal) — Sociedade Metropolitana de Desenvolvimento SA v Banco Santander Totta SA
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: banking, commercial law, conflict of jurisdiction, financial transaction, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, mutual recognition principle, private international law








C_2017161EN.01001702.xml










22.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/17





Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 10 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça — Portugal) — Sociedade Metropolitana de Desenvolvimento SA v Banco Santander Totta SA
(Case C-136/16) (1)

(2017/C 161/23)
Language of the case: Portuguese
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 165, 10.5.2016.
Case C-125/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma (Italy) lodged on 10 March 2017 — Luigi Bisignani v Agenzia delle Entrate -Direzione Provinciale 1 di Roma
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, administrative offence, free movement of capital, payment, principle of proportionality, principle of subsidiarity, tax evasion, tax exemption, tax law, third country








C_2017213EN.01001702.xml










3.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/17





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma (Italy) lodged on 10 March 2017 — Luigi Bisignani v Agenzia delle Entrate -Direzione Provinciale 1 di Roma
(Case C-125/17)
(2017/C 213/21)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Luigi Bisignani

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate -Direzione Provinciale 1 di Roma

Question referred

In so far as they permit the retention in national law of restrictions, in force at 31 December 1993, of movements of capital from or to third countries, in order to prevent potential losses of revenue for the Member States and permit the gathering of evidence of the irregularity or illegality of transactions that appear to be incompatible with, or in breach of, tax legislation and, on the basis of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality under Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union, distinguishing between taxpayers who do not find themselves in the same situation as regards their place of residence or as regards the place where their capital is invested, do Article 64 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in conjunction with the preceding Article 63 and subsequent Article 65 thereof, as well as Council Directive 2011/16/EU, (1) preclude national provisions that, in accordance with Article 9(1)(c) and (d) of Law No 97 of 6 August 2013 (European Law 2013), at least as interpreted by both parties, definitively abolished (rather than reframed) the tax offence established and penalised under Articles 4 and 5 of Decree-Law No 167 of 28 June 1990, converted, with amendments into Law No 227 of 4 August 1990, without, moreover, distinguishing the various cases of capital movement between Member States of the Union from those between the latter and States or territories with preferential tax regimes?


(1)  Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC (OJ 2011 L 64, p. 1).
Case T-625/16 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 10 March 2017 — Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej v ECHA (Interim measures — European Chemicals Agency — REACH — Fee payable for registration of a substance — Reduction granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises — Decision imposing an administrative charge and an additional fee — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — No urgency)
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrative formalities, aid to undertakings, payment, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2017144EN.01004602.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/46





Order of the President of the General Court of 10 March 2017 — Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej v ECHA
(Case T-625/16 R)
((Interim measures - European Chemicals Agency - REACH - Fee payable for registration of a substance - Reduction granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises - Decision imposing an administrative charge and an additional fee - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency))
(2017/C 144/64)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej sp. z o.o. (Grajewo, Poland) (represented by: T. Dobrzyński, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: E. Maurage, J. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU seeking the granting of interim measures (i) suspending implementation of Decision No SME (2016) 2851 of 23 June 2016 which found that the applicant was not entitled to the fee reductions applicable to medium-sized enterprises and (ii) ordering the defendant to cancel the invoices issued on the basis of that decision, namely ECHA invoices No 10058238 and No 10058239 of 23 June 2016.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-855/16 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 10 March 2017 — Fertisac v ECHA (Interim proceedings — REACH — Fee due for registration of a substance — Reduction granted to micro, small and medium-sized undertakings — Decision imposing an administrative charge and a supplementary fee — Application for suspension of operation — No urgency)
Date: 2017-03-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrative formalities, aid to undertakings, payment, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2017144EN.01004701.xml










8.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 144/47





Order of the President of the General Court of 10 March 2017 — Fertisac v ECHA
(Case T-855/16 R)
((Interim proceedings - REACH - Fee due for registration of a substance - Reduction granted to micro, small and medium-sized undertakings - Decision imposing an administrative charge and a supplementary fee - Application for suspension of operation - No urgency))
(2017/C 144/65)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Fertisac, SL (Atarfe, Spain) (represented by: J. Gomez Rodriguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: E. Maurage, J.-P. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, Agents, and C. Molyneux, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU and seeking a suspension of operation of Decision SME (2016) 5150, of 15 November 2016, finding that the applicant was not entitled to the fee reductions applicable to medium-sized undertakings, and of the invoices issued on the basis of that decision, namely ECHA invoices No 10060160 and No 10060161, dated 15 November 2016.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.