do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-501/15: Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — Netherlands v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Integrated administration and control system — Reductions and exclusions where the rules on cross-compliance are not observed — Minor non-compliance — Article 24(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 — Article 71(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 — Burden of proof — Interpretation of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009)
Date: 2017-03-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, aid to agriculture, closing of accounts, common agricultural policy, evaluation method, financial aid, rights of the defence, rural development








C_2017151EN.01003201.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/32





Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — Netherlands v Commission
(Case T-501/15) (1)

((EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Integrated administration and control system - Reductions and exclusions where the rules on cross-compliance are not observed - Minor non-compliance - Article 24(2) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 - Article 71(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 - Burden of proof - Interpretation of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009))
(2017/C 151/40)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman, B. Koopman and H. Stergiou, acting as Agents)

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

Intervener in support of the applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented initially by C. Brodie, subsequently by J. Kraehling, finally by J. Kraehling and G. Brown, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1119 of 22 June 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2015 L 182, 39) to the extent that it concerns the expenditure made by the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


The Kingdom of the Netherlands is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.










3.


The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 346, 19.10.2015.
Decision (EU, Euratom) 2017/620 of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 29 March 2017 appointing a Judge to the General Court
Date: 2017-03-29
Institutions: Representatives of the Governments of the Member States
Subjects: General Court (EU), appointment of members, member of the Court of Justice (EU)








L_2017089EN.01000901.xml










1.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 89/9








            DECISION (EU, Euratom) 2017/620 OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES
         
of 29 March 2017
         
appointing a Judge to the General Court


THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 19 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 254 and 255 thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Article 48 of Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/2422 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1), provides that the General Court consists of 47 Judges as from 1 September 2016. Article 2(b) of that Regulation fixes the term of office of the seven additional Judges in such a way that the end of their term of office corresponds to the partial replacements of the General Court which will take place on 1 September 2019 and 1 September 2022.












(2)


It is on that basis that Mr Colm MAC EOCHAIDH has been nominated for the post of additional Judge of the General Court.












(3)


The panel set up under Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given an opinion on the suitability of Mr MAC EOCHAIDH to perform the duties of Judge of the General Court.












(4)


Mr MAC EOCHAIDH should therefore be appointed for the period from the date of entry into force of this Decision to 31 August 2019,





HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Mr Colm MAC EOCHAIDH is hereby appointed Judge of the General Court for the period from the date of entry into force of this Decision to 31 August 2019.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 29 March 2017.


The President

M. BONNICI
            





(1)  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/2422 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union (OJ L 341, 24.12.2015, p. 14).
Case T-387/15: Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — J & Joy v EUIPO — Joy-Sportswear (J AND JOY) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — EU word mark J AND JOY — Earlier national figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods — Similarity of the signs — Assessment criteria — Composite mark — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-03-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017151EN.01003001.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/30





Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — J & Joy v EUIPO — Joy-Sportswear (J AND JOY)
(Case T-387/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - EU word mark J AND JOY - Earlier national figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Assessment criteria - Composite mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 151/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: J & Joy SA (Waremme, Belgium) (represented by: A. Maqua, C. Pirenne and C. Smits, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Joy-Sportswear GmbH (Ottensoos, Germany), (represented by: T. Kiphuth, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 April 2015 (Case R 1352/2014-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Joy-Sportswear and J & Joy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders J & Joy SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 381, 16.11.2015.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8373 — Europa Capital/Rezidor/PHD Polska) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-03-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, hotel industry, merger control








C_2017098EN.01000101.xml










29.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8373 — Europa Capital/Rezidor/PHD Polska)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 98/01)
On 22 March 2017, 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 English 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 32017M8373. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-03-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017098EN.01000201.xml










29.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 98/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

28 March 2017
(2017/C 98/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0859 




JPY


Japanese yen


119,84 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4406 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86455 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5318 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0693 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,2380 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,021 




HUF


Hungarian forint


309,19 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2470 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5529 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,9353 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4281 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4546 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4346 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5454 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5137 




KRW


South Korean won


1 209,11 




ZAR


South African rand


14,0518 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,4767 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4325 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 441,86 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7951 




PHP


Philippine peso


54,487 




RUB


Russian rouble


61,8842 




THB


Thai baht


37,371 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,3947 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,4927 




INR


Indian rupee


70,6435 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-388/15: Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — J & Joy v EUIPO — Joy-Sportswear (JN-JOY) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — EU word mark JN-JOY — Earlier national figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods — Similarity of the signs — Assessment criteria — Composite mark — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-03-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017151EN.01003101.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/31





Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2017 — J & Joy v EUIPO — Joy-Sportswear (JN-JOY)
(Case T-388/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - EU word mark JN-JOY - Earlier national figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Assessment criteria - Composite mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 151/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: J & Joy SA (Waremme, Belgium) (represented by: A. Maqua, C. Pirenne and C. Smits, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Joy-Sportswear GmbH (Ottensoos, Germany) (represented by: T. Kiphuth, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 April 2015 (Case R 1353/2014-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Joy-Sportswear and J & Joy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders J & Joy SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 381, 16.11.2015.