do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-376/17: Action brought on 14 June 2017 — Poland v Commission
Date: 2017-06-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAGF, EU aid, aid to agriculture, fruit, principle of proportionality, producer organisation, suspension of aid, suspension of payments, vegetable








C_2017269EN.01003001.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/30





Action brought on 14 June 2017 — Poland v Commission
(Case T-376/17)
(2017/C 269/41)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul European Commission Implementing Decision C(2017) 2104 final of 4 April 2017 extending the suspension of monthly payments to Poland concerning preliminary recognition aid for groups of producers in the fruit and vegetable sector within the framework of the European Agriculture Guarantee Fund (EAGF);










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed the second sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 41(2) of Regulation No 1306/2013, (1) read in conjunction with the introductory wording of the first subparagraph of that provision and Article 41(2)(b) of that regulation, by extending the suspension of monthly payments on the basis of errors of fact and misinterpretation of the law, notwithstanding the fact that the conditions for suspending monthly payments were not met.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission infringed the principle of proportionality and Article 41(3) of Regulation No 1306/2013 by maintaining the rate of suspension of monthly payments at a level that was flagrantly excessive in relation to the risk of potential loss to the European Union budget.






(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 549).
Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-subsidy measures
Date: 2017-06-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: China, countervailing charge, import (EU), iron and steel product, metal coating, originating product








C_2017188EN.01002001.xml










14.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 188/20





Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-subsidy measures
(2017/C 188/12)
1.   As provided for in Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the countervailing measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.
2.   Procedure

Union producers may lodge a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of subsidisation and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.
3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit H-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.
4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037.









Product


Country(ies) of origin or exportation


Measures


Reference


Date of expiry (3)





Organic coated steel products


The People’s Republic of China


Anti-subsidy duty


Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 215/2013 imposing a countervailing duty on imports of certain organic coated steel products originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ L 73, 15.3.2013, p. 16).


16.3.2018






(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 55.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1821 of 6 October 2016 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L 294, 28.10.2016)
Date: 2017-06-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, Taric, cereal flour, information technology, specification of tariff heading, sugar, tariff preference








L_2017150EN.01001901.xml










14.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 150/19







Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1821 of 6 October 2016 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 294 of 28 October 2016
)


On page 207, in the Annex, in the text replacing Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, in Part Two, in Section V, in Chapter 27, in the third paragraph of additional note 2(f):
for:


                  ‘The term “diluted colour C” means the colour of a product, as determined by the ISO 2049 method (equivalent to the ASTM D 1500 method), after one part of such product has been mixed with 100 parts by volume of xylene, toluene or another suitable solvent. The colour must be determined immediately after dilution.’,

read:


                  ‘The term “diluted colour C” means the colour of a product, as determined by the ISO 2049 method (equivalent to the ASTM D 1500 method), after one part of the product has been made up to 100 parts by volume with xylene, toluene or another suitable solvent. The colour must be determined immediately after dilution.’.
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-06-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical compound, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard








C_2017188EN.01000301.xml










14.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 188/3





Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006
 (1)
)

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 188/03)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2017) 3764


7 June 2017


Sodium dichromate
EC No 234-190-3
CAS No 7789-12-0 10588-01-9


Solvay Portugal – Produtos Quimicos S.A., Rua Eng. Clement Dumoulin, 2625-106 Povoa de Santa Iria, Portugal


REACH/17/17/0


Use of sodium dichromate as an additive for supressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacture of sodium chlorate with or without subsequent production of chlorine dioxide or sodium chlorite


21 September 2029


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8439 — Wärtsilä/CSSC/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-06-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aeronautical industry, aerospace industry, building industry, economic concentration, energy production, merger control, petrochemicals, shipbuilding








C_2017188EN.01002501.xml










14.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 188/25





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8439 — Wärtsilä/CSSC/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 188/17)






1.


On 1 June 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Wärtsilä Technology Oy Ab, controlled by Wärtsilä Corporation (‘Wärtsilä’, Finland), and CSSC Electronics Technology Co., Ltd, controlled by China State Shipbuilding Corporation (‘CSSC’, China), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking CSSC Wärtsilä Electrical & Automation (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (‘JV’, China) by way of a purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Wärtsilä: supply of complete lifecycle power solutions for the marine and energy markets,
—   for CSSC: shipbuilding and production of marine-related equipment, as well as non-marine related activities such as aerospace, construction, power generation and petrochemicals,
—   for JV: supply of marine electrical, automation and navigation systems in People’s Republic of China.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in this Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8439 — Wärtsilä/CSSC/JV, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-659/16: Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO (Second Display) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark Second Display — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptiveness — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-06-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic device, mobile phone, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017249EN.01002801.xml










31.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 249/28






Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2017 — LG Electronics v EUIPO (Second Display)
(Case T-659/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Second Display - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 249/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO dated 10 June 2016 (Case R 106/2016-1) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Second Display as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders LG Electronics, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.