do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017203EN.01000201.xml










27.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 203/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

26 June 2017
(2017/C 203/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1187 




JPY


Japanese yen


124,93 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4364 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87830 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,7618 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0881 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,4788 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,243 




HUF


Hungarian forint


309,48 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2108 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5749 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,9244 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4771 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4812 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7254 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5371 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5533 




KRW


South Korean won


1 271,44 




ZAR


South African rand


14,4089 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6541 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4126 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 882,47 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7970 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,151 




RUB


Russian rouble


66,0390 




THB


Thai baht


38,008 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,7259 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,0412 




INR


Indian rupee


72,0980 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-401/17: Action brought on 27 June 2017 — Tengelmann Warenhandelsgesellschaft v EUIPO — C & C IP (T)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business management, catering industry, hotel industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017269EN.01003401.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/34





Action brought on 27 June 2017 — Tengelmann Warenhandelsgesellschaft v EUIPO — C & C IP (T)
(Case T-401/17)
(2017/C 269/46)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Tengelmann Warenhandelsgesellschaft KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: H. Prange, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: C & C IP Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘T’ — Application for registration No 11 623 022

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 April 2017 in Case R 502/2015-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the contested decision and amend it to the effect that the opposition is rejected in its entirety;










—


order the defendant and, as the case may be, the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs of the appeal proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-402/17: Action brought on 27 June 2017 — Vienna International Hotelmanagement v EUIPO (Vienna House)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, camping, hotel industry, registered trade mark, sports facilities, trade-mark law, travel agency








C_2017277EN.01005001.xml










21.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 277/50





Action brought on 27 June 2017 — Vienna International Hotelmanagement v EUIPO (Vienna House)
(Case T-402/17)
(2017/C 277/72)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Vienna International Hotelmanagement AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: M. Zrzavy, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘Vienna House’ — Application No 14 501 357

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 April 2017 in Case R 333/2016-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-384/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 27 June 2017 — Dooel Uvoz-Izvoz Skopje Link Logistic N&N v Budapest Rendőrfőkapitánya
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, charges for use of infrastructure, direct applicability, large vehicle, principle of proportionality








C_2017318EN.01000602.xml










25.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/6





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 27 June 2017 — Dooel Uvoz-Izvoz Skopje Link Logistic N&N v Budapest Rendőrfőkapitánya
(Case C-384/17)
(2017/C 318/10)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Szombathelyi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Dooel Uvoz-Izvoz Skopje Link Logistic N&N

Defendant: Budapest Rendőrfőkapitánya

Questions referred







1.


Is the requirement of proportionality laid down in Article 9a of Directive 1999/62/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, and interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union in its judgment of 22 March 2017 in Joined Cases C-497/15 and C-498/15, Euro-Team, a directly applicable provision of the directive?










2.


If the requirement of proportionality laid down in Article 9a of Directive 1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, and interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union in its judgment of 22 March 2017 in Joined Cases C-497/15 and C-498/15, Euro-Team, is not a directly applicable provision of the directive:
does the interpretation of national law in conformity with EU law permit and require the national court and administrative authority to supplement — in the absence of legislative action at national level — the relevant Hungarian legislation in the present proceedings with the substantive criteria of the requirement of proportionality, laid down in the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 22 March 2017 in Joined Cases C-497/15 and C-498/15, Euro-Team?






(1)  OJ 1999 L 187, p. 42.
Case C-74/16: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 27 June 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 4 de Madrid — Spain) — Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania v Ayuntamiento de Getafe (Reference for a preliminary ruling — State aid — Article 107(1) TFEU — Meaning of ‘State aid’ — Meaning of ‘undertaking’ and ‘economic activity’ — Other conditions for the application of Article 107(1) TFEU — Article 108(1) and (3) TFEU — Meaning of ‘new aid’ and ‘existing aid’ — Agreement of 3 January 1979 between the Kingdom of Spain and the Holy See — Tax on construction, installations and works — Exemption for buildings belonging to the Catholic Church)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Catholicism, Holy See, Spain, State aid, building, control of State aid, tax, tax exemption








C_2017283EN.01000501.xml










28.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 283/5





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 27 June 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 4 de Madrid — Spain) — Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania v Ayuntamiento de Getafe
(Case C-74/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - State aid - Article 107(1) TFEU - Meaning of ‘State aid’ - Meaning of ‘undertaking’ and ‘economic activity’ - Other conditions for the application of Article 107(1) TFEU - Article 108(1) and (3) TFEU - Meaning of ‘new aid’ and ‘existing aid’ - Agreement of 3 January 1979 between the Kingdom of Spain and the Holy See - Tax on construction, installations and works - Exemption for buildings belonging to the Catholic Church))
(2017/C 283/06)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo No 4 de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania

Defendant: Ayuntamiento de Getafe

Operative part of the judgment

A tax exemption such as that at issue in the main proceedings, to which a congregation belonging to the Catholic Church is entitled in respect of works on a building intended to be used for activities that do not have a strictly religious purpose, may fall under the prohibition in Article 107(1) TFEU if, and to the extent to which, those activities are economic, a matter which it is for the referring court to determine.


(1)  OJ C 145, 25.4.2016.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8538 — IFM/OHL/OHL Mexico) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: building industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, transport infrastructure








C_2017203EN.01000301.xml










27.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 203/3





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8538 — IFM/OHL/OHL Mexico)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 203/03)






1.


On 16 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 IFM Investors Pty Ltd (‘IFM’, Australia) and Obrascon Huarte Lain, S.A. (‘OHL’, Spain) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking OHL México S.A.B. de C.V. (‘OHL Mexico’, Mexico), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for IFM: global investment manager with assets across infrastructure, listed equities, private capital and debt investments.
—   for OHL: provision of infrastructure and industrial construction projects and concessions (development and operation of toll roads, ports, railways, and airports). OHL is part of the Villar Mir group.
—   for OHL Mexico: active in building, managing and operation of seven toll roads and one airport, all located in Mexico.










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 Case M.8538 — IFM/OHL/OHL Mexico, 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-13/15: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Deutsche Post v EUIPO — Media Logistik (PostModern) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark PostModern — Earlier national word mark POST and earlier EU word mark Deutsche Post — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Evidence submitted for the first time before the General Court)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, postal service, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vehicle rental








C_2017256EN.01001901.xml










7.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 256/19





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Deutsche Post v EUIPO — Media Logistik (PostModern)
(Case T-13/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark PostModern - Earlier national word mark POST and earlier EU word mark Deutsche Post - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Evidence submitted for the first time before the General Court))
(2017/C 256/18)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Post AG (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: initially K. Hamacher and C. Giersdorf, K. Hamacher, and finally K. Hamacher and G. Müllejans, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Media Logistik GmbH (Dresden, Germany) (represented by: S. Risthaus, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 November 2014 (Case R 2063/2013-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Deutsche Post and Media Logistik.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Deutsche Post AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.
Case T-580/15: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Flamagas v EUIPO — MatMind (CLIPPER) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Three-dimensional EU trade mark — Shape of a lighter with a lateral fin, featuring the word element CLIPPER — Shape necessary to obtain a technical result — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (e)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — No description of the mark in the application for registration)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_2017256EN.01002001.xml










7.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 256/20





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Flamagas v EUIPO — MatMind (CLIPPER)
(Case T-580/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a lighter with a lateral fin, featuring the word element CLIPPER - Shape necessary to obtain a technical result - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (e)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No description of the mark in the application for registration))
(2017/C 256/20)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Flamagas, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, G. Hinarejos Mulliez and D. Gabarre Armengol, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being: MatMind Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipriani and M. Cavattoni, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 July 2015 (Case R 924/2013-1) relating to invalidity proceedings between MatMind and Flamagas.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Flamagas, SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
Case T-327/16: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Aldi Einkauf v EUIPO — Fratelli Polli (ANTICO CASALE) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark ANTICO CASALE — Absolute grounds for refusal — Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic commerce, foodstuff, marketing, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2017256EN.01002601.xml










7.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 256/26





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Aldi Einkauf v EUIPO — Fratelli Polli (ANTICO CASALE)
(Case T-327/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark ANTICO CASALE - Absolute grounds for refusal - Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2017/C 256/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and N. Bertram, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Fratelli Polli, SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: C. Bacchini, M. Mazzitelli and E. Rondinelli, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 April 2016 (Case R 1337/2015-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Aldi Einkauf and Fratelli Polli.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 287, 8.8.2016.
Case T-233/16: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Ruiz Molina v EUIPO (Appeal — Civil Service — Members of the temporary staff — Fixed-term contract with a termination clause ending the contract if the staff member’s name is not included on the reserve list of the next open competition — Termination of the contract by application of the termination clause — Reclassification of a fixed-term contract as a contract of unlimited duration — Res judicata — Clause 5(1) of the Framework Agreement on fixed- term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: competition (EU), servant (EU), temporary employment, termination of a contract, termination of employment








C_2017269EN.01001501.xml










14.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 269/15





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Ruiz Molina v EUIPO
(Case T-233/16) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract with a termination clause ending the contract if the staff member’s name is not included on the reserve list of the next open competition - Termination of the contract by application of the termination clause - Reclassification of a fixed-term contract as a contract of unlimited duration - Res judicata - Clause 5(1) of the Framework Agreement on fixed- term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 269/20)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: José Luis Ruiz Molina (San Juan de Alicante, Spain) (represented by: N. Lhoëst and S. Michiels, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė, acting as Agent, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 2 March 2016, Ruiz Molina v OHMI (F 60/15, EU:F:2016:28) seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr José Luis Ruiz Molina to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in the appeal.






(1)  OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.
Case C-683/15: Order of the President of the Court of 27 June 2017 — European Commission v Republic of Poland
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid for restructuring, approximation of laws, company in difficulties, credit institution, financial aid, financial intervention, financial solvency, investment company, national implementing measure, sanction (EU)








C_2017300EN.01002702.xml










11.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 300/27





Order of the President of the Court of 27 June 2017 — European Commission v Republic of Poland
(Case C-683/15) (1)

(2017/C 300/32)
Language of the case: Polish
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.
Case T-685/16: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Jiménez Gasalla v EUIPO (B2B SOLUTIONS) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark B2B SOLUTIONS — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business management, computer equipment, consultancy, information technology, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2017256EN.01002602.xml










7.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 256/26





Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Jiménez Gasalla v EUIPO (B2B SOLUTIONS)
(Case T-685/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark B2B SOLUTIONS - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 256/30)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Carlos Javier Jiménez Gasalla (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Estella Garbayo, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2016 (case R 244/2016-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign B2B SOLUTIONS as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Carlos Javier Jiménez Gasalla to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8479 — Advent International/Bain Capital Investors/Ratepay) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronic money, investment company, merger control, payment








C_2017203EN.01000101.xml










27.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 203/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8479 — Advent International/Bain Capital Investors/Ratepay)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 203/01)
On 19 June 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 32017M8479. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.