do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-599/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Council of the European Union v Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Kingdom of the Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, European Commission (Appeal — Common foreign and security policy — Fight against terrorism — Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities — Freezing of funds — Common Position 2001/931/CFSP — Article 1(4) and (6) — Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Article 2(3) — Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts — Conditions — Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds — Decision taken by a competent authority — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, terrorism, trade restriction








C_2017309EN.01000201.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/2





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Council of the European Union v Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Kingdom of the Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, European Commission
(Case C-599/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Fight against terrorism - Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities - Freezing of funds - Common Position 2001/931/CFSP - Article 1(4) and (6) - Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 - Article 2(3) - Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts - Conditions - Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds - Decision taken by a competent authority - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 309/02)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Finnegan, B. Driessen and G. Étienne, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (represented by: T. Buruma and A.M. van Eik, advocaten), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman and J. Langer, Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Brandon, C. Crane, J. Kraehling and V. Kaye, Agents, and by M. Gray, Barrister), European Commission (represented by: D. Gauci and F. Castillo de la Torre, Agents)

Intervener in support of the appellant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, F. Fize, D. Colas and B. Fodda, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE);










3.


Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Commission to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.
Case C-175/16: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Hannele Hälvä, Sari Naukkarinen, Pirjo Paajanen, Satu Piik v SOS-Lapsikylä ry (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2003/88/EC — Article 17 — Protection of the safety and health of workers — Organisation of working time — Additional payments — Child protection association — ‘Children’s village parents’ — Temporary absence of ‘foster parents’ — Workers employed as ‘relief parents’ — Definition)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: additional benefit, arrangement of working time, association, child care, child protection, custody, family, occupational safety, working time








C_2017309EN.01001001.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/10





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Hannele Hälvä, Sari Naukkarinen, Pirjo Paajanen, Satu Piik v SOS-Lapsikylä ry
(Case C-175/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2003/88/EC - Article 17 - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Organisation of working time - Additional payments - Child protection association - ‘Children’s village parents’ - Temporary absence of ‘foster parents’ - Workers employed as ‘relief parents’ - Definition))
(2017/C 309/12)
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Hannele Hälvä, Sari Naukkarinen, Pirjo Paajanen, Satu Piik

Defendant: SOS-Lapsikylä ry

Operative part of the judgment

Article 17(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time must be interpreted as meaning that it cannot apply to paid work, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which consists in caring for children in a family-like environment, relieving the person principally responsible for that task, where it is not established that the working time as a whole is not measured or predetermined or it may be determined by the worker himself, which is for the national court to ascertain.


(1)  OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.
Case C-225/16: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Criminal proceedings against Mossa Ouhrami (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Return of illegally staying third-country nationals — Directive 2008/115/EC — Article 11(2) — Decision to impose an entry ban taken before that directive entered into force and relating to a longer period than that provided for by the directive — Time from which the period of the entry ban starts to run)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, EU migration policy, area of freedom, security and justice, foreign national, illegal migration, removal, residence permit, return migration, third country








C_2017309EN.01001201.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/12





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Criminal proceedings against Mossa Ouhrami
(Case C-225/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Return of illegally staying third-country nationals - Directive 2008/115/EC - Article 11(2) - Decision to impose an entry ban taken before that directive entered into force and relating to a longer period than that provided for by the directive - Time from which the period of the entry ban starts to run))
(2017/C 309/15)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Party in the main proceedings

Mossa Ouhrami

Operative part of the judgment

Article 11(2) of 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 staying third-country nationals must be interpreted as meaning that the starting point of the duration of an entry ban, as referred to in that provision, which in principle may not exceed five years, must be calculated from the date on which the person concerned actually left the territory of the Member States.


(1)  OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.
Case C-84/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH v Compagnie générale des établissements Michelin and European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(1)(b) — Figurative mark including the word element ‘XKING’ — Opposition by the proprietor of national marks and an international registration including the word element ‘X’ — Rejection of opposition by the Board of Appeal — Likelihood of confusion — Distortion of the evidence)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, pneumatic tyre, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017309EN.01000801.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/8





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH v Compagnie générale des établissements Michelin and European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
(Case C-84/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(1)(b) - Figurative mark including the word element ‘XKING’ - Opposition by the proprietor of national marks and an international registration including the word element ‘X’ - Rejection of opposition by the Board of Appeal - Likelihood of confusion - Distortion of the evidence))
(2017/C 309/10)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH (represented by: S.O. Gillert, K. Vanden Bossche, B. Köhn-Gerdes and J. Schumacher, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Compagnie générale des établissements Michelin (represented by: E. Carrillo, abogada), European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer, Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Continental Reifen Deutschland GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Compagnie générale des établissements Michelin;










3.


Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.
Case C-696/15 P: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Czech Republic v European Commission (Appeal — Transport — Directive 2010/40/EU — Deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport — Article 7 — Delegation of power to the European Commission — Limits — Delegated Regulation (EU) No 885/2013 — Provision of information services for safe and secure parking places for trucks and commercial vehicles — Delegated Regulation (EU) No 886/2013 — Data and procedures for the provision of road safety-related minimum universal traffic information free of charge to users — Article 290 TFEU — Explicit definition of the objectives, content, scope and duration of the delegation of power — Essential element of the matter in question — Establishment of a supervisory body)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, commercial vehicle, delegated regulation, information, intelligent transport system, parking area, provision of services, road safety, transfer of competence








C_2017309EN.01000701.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/7





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Czech Republic v European Commission
(Case C-696/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Transport - Directive 2010/40/EU - Deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport - Article 7 - Delegation of power to the European Commission - Limits - Delegated Regulation (EU) No 885/2013 - Provision of information services for safe and secure parking places for trucks and commercial vehicles - Delegated Regulation (EU) No 886/2013 - Data and procedures for the provision of road safety-related minimum universal traffic information free of charge to users - Article 290 TFEU - Explicit definition of the objectives, content, scope and duration of the delegation of power - Essential element of the matter in question - Establishment of a supervisory body))
(2017/C 309/08)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Appellant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil, T. Müller and J. Pavliš, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Buchet, P.J.O. Van Nuffel, J. Hottiaux and Z. Malůšková, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.
Case T-495/17: Action brought on 26 July 2017 — Sedes Holding v EUIPO (gratis)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, chemical product, cosmetic product, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017318EN.01002401.xml










25.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/24





Action brought on 26 July 2017 — Sedes Holding v EUIPO (gratis)
(Case T-495/17)
(2017/C 318/30)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Sedes Holding AŞ (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: K. Ongena and C. Du Jardin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark containing the word element ‘gratis’ — Application for EU trade mark No 15 950 637

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 May 2017 in Case R 507/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


pursuant to Article 68 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, join the case dealt with in the present application with the action against the decision of EUIPO in Case R 506/2017-2 for the purposes of the oral procedure in view of the connection between them;










—


declare the action set out in the application to be admissible and well founded, and accordingly:






—


primarily, annul the contested decision and order EUIPO to register EU trade mark application No 15 950 637 for the figurative mark GRATIS in the trade mark register for all goods claimed under that registration;










—


in the alternative, annul the contested decision and order EUIPO to register EU trade mark application No 15 950 637 for the figurative mark GRATIS in the trade mark register for ‘perfumery, cosmetic products, fragrances and deodorants for personal use’;














—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


infringement of the general principles of EU law.
Case C-348/16: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano- Italy) — Moussa Sacko v Commissione Territoriale per il riconoscimento della protezione internazionale di Milano (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Asylum policy — Directive 2013/32/EU — Articles 12, 14, 31 and 46 — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Right to effective judicial protection — Appeal against a decision refusing an application for international protection — Whether it is possible for the court to adjudicate without hearing the applicant)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU migration policy, foreign national, right of asylum, right to justice








C_2017309EN.01001202.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/12





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano- Italy) — Moussa Sacko v Commissione Territoriale per il riconoscimento della protezione internazionale di Milano
(Case C-348/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Asylum policy - Directive 2013/32/EU - Articles 12, 14, 31 and 46 - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 47 - Right to effective judicial protection - Appeal against a decision refusing an application for international protection - Whether it is possible for the court to adjudicate without hearing the applicant))
(2017/C 309/16)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Moussa Sacko

Defendant: Commissione Territoriale per il riconoscimento della protezione internazionale di Milano

Operative part of the judgment

Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, in particular Articles 12, 14, 31 and 46 thereof, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding the national court or tribunal hearing an appeal against a decision rejecting a manifestly unfounded application for international protection from dismissing the appeal without hearing the applicant where the factual circumstances leave no doubt as to whether that decision was well founded, on condition that, first, during the proceedings at first instance, the applicant was given the opportunity of a personal interview on his or her application for international protection, in accordance with Article 14 of the directive, and the report or transcript of the interview, if an interview was conducted, was placed on the case-file, in accordance with Article 17(2) of the directive, and, second, the court hearing the appeal may order that a hearing be conducted if it considers it necessary for the purpose of ensuring that there is a full and ex nunc examination of both facts and points of law, as required under Article 46(3) of the directive.


(1)  OJ C 343, 19.9.2016.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2017241EN.01000101.xml










26.7.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 241/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

25 July 2017
(2017/C 241/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1694 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,28 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4361 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89395 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5545 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1063 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3035 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


26,013 




HUF


Hungarian forint


305,49 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2571 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5635 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,1647 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4693 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4608 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1310 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5712 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5900 




KRW


South Korean won


1 305,86 




ZAR


South African rand


15,2161 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8949 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4128 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 574,07 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,0074 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,189 




RUB


Russian rouble


69,9831 




THB


Thai baht


39,093 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,6755 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,7211 




INR


Indian rupee


75,2920 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-79/15 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Council of the European Union v Hamas, European Commission (Appeal — Common foreign and security policy — Fight against terrorism — Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities — Freezing of funds — Common Position 2001/931/CFSP — Article 1(4) and (6) — Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 — Article 2(3) — Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts — Conditions — Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds — Decision taken by a competent authority — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, terrorism, trade restriction








C_2017309EN.01000401.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/4





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Council of the European Union v Hamas, European Commission
(Case C-79/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Fight against terrorism - Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities - Freezing of funds - Common Position 2001/931/CFSP - Article 1(4) and (6) - Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 - Article 2(3) - Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts - Conditions - Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds - Decision taken by a competent authority - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 309/04)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen, G. Étienne and M. Bishop, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Hamas (represented by: L. Glock, avocate), European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, M. Konstantinidis and R. Tricot, Agents)

Intervener in support of the appellant: French Republic (represented by: D. Colas, F. Fize and G. de Bergues, Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1


Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 17 December 2014, Hamas v Council (T-400/10, EU:T:2014:1095);










2


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;










3


Reserves the costs.






(1)  OJ C 146, 4.5.2015.
Case T-465/17: Action brought on 26 July 2017 — VKR Holding v EUIPO (VELUX)
Date: 2017-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, building technique, electronic equipment, furniture industry, metal product, office supplies, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2017309EN.01003701.xml










18.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 309/37





Action brought on 26 July 2017 — VKR Holding v EUIPO (VELUX)
(Case T-465/17)
(2017/C 309/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: VKR Holding A/S (Søborg, Denmark) (represented by: J. Heebøll, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘VELUX’ — Recordal application No T 2 299 611

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 May 2017 in Case R 1927/2016-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


overturn the decision of the Board to dismiss the appeal and thereby allow recordal request no. T 2 299 611 relating to EUTM 000651869 (VELUX),










—


alternatively, refer the case back to the Board.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 34(2) and Rule 28 of EUTMIR.