do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-849/16 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — PGNiG Supply & Trading v Commission (Application for interim measures — Internal market in natural gas — Directive 2009/73/EC — Application by the Bundesnetzagentur for review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the EU requirements for its operation — Commission decision amending the exemption from the EU requirements — Application for a stay of execution of a measure — Lack of any urgency)
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: derogation from EU law, energy supply, gas pipeline, gas supply, natural gas, security of supply








C_2017293EN.01003401.xml










4.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/34





Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — PGNiG Supply & Trading v Commission
(Case T-849/16 R)
((Application for interim measures - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Application by the Bundesnetzagentur for review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the EU requirements for its operation - Commission decision amending the exemption from the EU requirements - Application for a stay of execution of a measure - Lack of any urgency))
(2017/C 293/40)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: PGNiG Supply & Trading GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Jeżewski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: O. Beynet and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and R. Kanitz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Request on the basis of Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU seeking a stay of execution of Commission Decision C(2016) 6950 final of 28 October 2016 on review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the requirements on third party access and tariff regulation granted under Directive 2003/55/EC.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The order of 23 December 2016, PGNiG Supply & Trading GmbH v Commission (T-849/16 R) is revoked.










3.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-130/17 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo v Commission (Application for interim measures — Internal market in natural gas — Directive 2009/73/EC — Application by the Bundesnetzagentur for review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the EU requirements for its operation — Commission decision amending the exemption from the EU requirements — Application for a stay of execution of a measure — Lack of any urgency)
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: derogation from EU law, energy supply, gas pipeline, gas supply, natural gas, security of supply








C_2017293EN.01003501.xml










4.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/35





Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo v Commission
(Case T-130/17 R)
((Application for interim measures - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Application by the Bundesnetzagentur for review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the EU requirements for its operation - Commission decision amending the exemption from the EU requirements - Application for a stay of execution of a measure - Lack of any urgency))
(2017/C 293/42)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Jeżewski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: O. Beynet and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and R. Kanitz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Request on the basis of Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU seeking a stay of execution of Commission Decision C(2016) 6950 final of 28 October 2016 on review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the requirements on third party access and tariff regulation granted under Directive 2003/55/EC.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8456 — Ineos/Forties Pipeline System) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, gas industry, gas pipeline, merger control, oil industry, oil pipeline, petrochemicals








C_2017236EN.01000101.xml










21.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8456 — Ineos/Forties Pipeline System)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 236/01)
On 14 July 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 32017M8456. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-131/17 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — Argus Security Projects v EEAS (Interim measures — EEAS — Recovery by offsetting — Application for interim measures — Financial loss — Duty of care — No urgency)
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: financial loss, indemnification, provision of services, security services








C_2017293EN.01003502.xml










4.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/35





Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — Argus Security Projects v EEAS
(Case T-131/17 R)
((Interim measures - EEAS - Recovery by offsetting - Application for interim measures - Financial loss - Duty of care - No urgency))
(2017/C 293/43)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Argus Security Projects Ltd (Limassol, Cyprus) (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt, acting as Agent, and by B. Allemeersch, W. De Meester and G. Scraeyen, lawyers)

Re:

Application on the basis of Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking the grant of interim measures ordering, first, the suspension of operation of the Commission’s offsetting decisions, acting on behalf of the accounting officer of the EEAS, of the respective amounts of EUR 100 600, EUR 41 522 and EUR 52 600 (decisions communicated on 15 March 2017), EUR 58 924 (decision communicated on 7 April 2017) and EUR 41 422 (decision communicated on 19 April 2017) and, secondly, an injunction against EEAS adopting any further offsetting decision against the applicant pending delivery of a final judgment concerning the dispute related to the performance of the framework contract 2008/14/SEC/RELEX/K8, pending before the Court of First Instance of Brussels (Belgium).

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-883/16 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — Poland v Commission (Application for interim measures — Internal market in natural gas — Directive 2009/73/EC — Application by the Bundesnetzagentur for review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the EU requirements for its operation — Commission decision amending the exemption from the EU requirements — Application for a stay of execution of a measure — Lack of any urgency)
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: derogation from EU law, energy supply, gas pipeline, gas supply, natural gas, security of supply








C_2017293EN.01003402.xml










4.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/34





Order of the President of the General Court of 21 July 2017 — Poland v Commission
(Case T-883/16 R)
((Application for interim measures - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Application by the Bundesnetzagentur for review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the EU requirements for its operation - Commission decision amending the exemption from the EU requirements - Application for a stay of execution of a measure - Lack of any urgency))
(2017/C 293/41)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, M. Kawnik and K. Rudzińska, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: O. Beynet and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas and R. Krasuckaitė, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and R. Kanitz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Request on the basis of Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU seeking a stay of execution of Commission Decision C(2016) 6950 final of 28 October 2016 on review of the exemption of the OPAL pipeline from the requirements on third party access and tariff regulation granted under Directive 2003/55/EC.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is rejected.










2.


The order of 23 December 2016 is revoked insofar as it relates to Case T-883/16 R.










3.


The costs are reserved.
Case C-444/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 21 July 2017 — Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales v Abdelaziz Arib, Procureur de la République près le tribunal de grande instance de Montpellier, Procureur général près la cour d’appel de Montpellier
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: border control, external border of the EU, foreign national, illegal migration, imprisonment, internal border of the EU, return migration








C_2017330EN.01000701.xml










2.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 330/7





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 21 July 2017 — Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales v Abdelaziz Arib, Procureur de la République près le tribunal de grande instance de Montpellier, Procureur général près la cour d’appel de Montpellier
(Case C-444/17)
(2017/C 330/09)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales

Respondents: Abdelaziz Arib, Procureur de la République près le tribunal de grande instance de Montpellier, Procureur général près la cour d’appel de Montpellier

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 32 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/399 (1) of 9 March 2016, which provides that, when border control at internal borders is reintroduced, the relevant provisions of Title II (relating to external borders) are to apply mutatis mutandis, to be interpreted to the effect that border controls reintroduced at an internal border of a Member State may be equated with border controls at an external border, when that border is crossed by a third-country national who has no right of entry?










2.


In the same circumstances of reintroduction of controls at internal borders, do that regulation and Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally (2) staying third-country nationals permit the application to the situation of a third-country national crossing a border at which controls have been reintroduced of the power, conferred on them by Article 2(2)(a) of the directive, to continue to apply simplified national return procedures at their external borders?










3.


If the answer to the previous question should be affirmative, do the provisions of Article 2(2)(a) and of Article 4(4) of the directive preclude national legislation such as Article L.621-2 Ceseda, which penalises with a term of imprisonment the illegal entry into national territory of a third-country national in respect of whom the return procedure established by that directive has not yet been completed?






(1)  Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), (OJ 2016 L 77, p. 1).

(2)  OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98.
Case T-459/17: Action brought on 21 July 2017 — Fifth Avenue Entertainment v EUIPO — Commodore Entertainment Corporation (THE COMMODORES)
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, music, recording, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017309EN.01003601.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/36





Action brought on 21 July 2017 — Fifth Avenue Entertainment v EUIPO — Commodore Entertainment Corporation (THE COMMODORES)
(Case T-459/17)
(2017/C 309/47)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Fifth Avenue Entertainment LLC (Orlando, Florida, United States) (represented by: B. Brandreth, barrister and D. Cañadas Arcas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Commodore Entertainment Corporation (Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘THE COMMODORES’ — Application for registration No 13 370 077

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 May 2017 in Case R 851/2016-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


payment of the appellant’s cost.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(4) of No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 8(2)(c) of No 207/2009.
Case T-456/17: Action brought on 21 July 2017 — Lupu v EUIPO — Dzhihangir (Djili soy original DS)
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, agricultural product, animal feedingstuffs, beer, business management, foodstuff, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017309EN.01003501.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/35





Action brought on 21 July 2017 — Lupu v EUIPO — Dzhihangir (Djili soy original DS)
(Case T-456/17)
(2017/C 309/46)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Victor Lupu (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: P. Acsinte, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ibryam Dzhihangir (Silistra, Bulgaria)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Djili soy original DS’ — Application for registration No 8 810 558

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 03 May 2017 in Case R 516/2011-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


uphold the opposition against the registration of EUTMA 008404551 ‘Djili DS’ and/or to cancel the registration of EUTMA 008404551 ‘Djili DS’;










—


in subsidiary, annul the Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal dated 03/05/2017 concerning the appeal R 516/2011-5 and to order the resumption of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and further to order the Board of Appeal to maintain the suspension of its proceedings until a written, motivated and signed final decision on the appeal for annulment, docket no. 2794/1/2016, is provided to the Board of Appeal;










—


order EUIPO and DZHIHANGIR Ibryam to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 1, 1st Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights;










—


Infringement of Rule 20(7)(a) and (c) of the Commission Regulation (EC) no.2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) no. 40/94 on the Community trade mark;










—



Mutatis mutandis article 53(2)(c) and (d) of the Council Regulation (EC) no. 207/2009 in respect of the applicant’s copyright for the picture of the package ‘Djili’ written in red letters on a blue package with the figure of a parrot and in respect of the applicant’s rights to use a trade name for products in the sense of the Judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Case C-17/06 ‘Celine’;










—


Other relevant legal provision.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-07-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017236EN.01000601.xml










21.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/6





Euro exchange rates (1)

20 July 2017
(2017/C 236/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1485 




JPY


Japanese yen


128,92 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4367 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88718 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5678 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1039 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3000 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,040 




HUF


Hungarian forint


305,77 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2100 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5655 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,0652 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4510 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4487 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9700 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5631 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5738 




KRW


South Korean won


1 291,52 




ZAR


South African rand


14,9020 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7760 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4103 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 314,67 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9288 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,428 




RUB


Russian rouble


67,8540 




THB


Thai baht


38,653 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,6166 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,2035 




INR


Indian rupee


74,0100 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.