do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 150/2017 of 28 August 2017 amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms [2019/1038]
Date: 2017-08-28
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, financial year, general budget (EU), goods and services, protocol to an agreement, revision of an agreement, single market




L_2019174EN.01000101.xml










27.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 174/1








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
         
No 150/2017
of 28 August 2017
         
amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on cooperation in specific fields outside the four freedoms [2019/1038]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Articles 86 and 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


It is appropriate to continue the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement in Union actions funded from the general budget of the European Union regarding the operation and development of the internal market of goods and services.












(2)


In addition, the cooperation of the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement should be extended to Union actions funded from the general budget of the European Union regarding internal market governance tools.












(3)


Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended in order to allow for this extended cooperation to take place from 1 January 2017,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 7 of Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement:






1.


In paragraph 12, the words ‘the financial year 2016’ are replaced by the words ‘the financial years 2016 and 2017’.










2.


The following paragraph is added:






‘14.


The EFTA States shall, as from 1 January 2017, participate in Union actions related to the following budget line, entered into the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017:






—



Budget line 02 03 04: “Internal market governance tools”.’
                                             














Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the day following the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement (*1).
It shall apply from 1 January 2017.


Article 3
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 28 August 2017.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Sabine MONAUNI
            





(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Case T-587/17: Action brought on 28 August 2017 — Unigroup v EUIPO — Pronova Laboratories (nailicin)
Date: 2017-08-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, pesticide, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017347EN.01004801.xml










16.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/48





Action brought on 28 August 2017 — Unigroup v EUIPO — Pronova Laboratories (nailicin)
(Case T-587/17)
(2017/C 347/63)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Unigroup ApS (Lyngby, Denmark) (represented by: M. Rijsdijk, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pronova Laboratories BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘nailicin’ — Application for registration No 14 096 499

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 June 2017 in Case R 2359/2016-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


declare Benelux registration no. 894 557 unsubstantiated and remit the matter to the Opposition Division or Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


violation of Rule 19 of Commission Regulation No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark.
Case C-518/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 28 August 2017 — Stefan Rudigier
Date: 2017-08-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: bus, carriage of passengers, disclosure of information, rail transport, services of general interest, tendering








C_2017392EN.01001601.xml










20.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 28 August 2017 — Stefan Rudigier
(Case C-518/17)
(2017/C 392/21)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Stefan Rudigier

Other party in the appeal on a point of law: Salzburger Verkehrsverbund GmbH

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 (1) on public passenger transport services by rail and by road also applicable in the case of the award of a service contract pursuant to the second sentence of Article 5(1) of that regulation for passenger transport services by bus in accordance with a procedure laid down in the Procurement Directives (Directive 2004/17/EC or Directive 2004/18/EC)?










2.


If the first question is answered in the affirmative:
Does a breach of the obligation to publish, at least one year before the launch of an invitation to tender procedure, the information indicated in Article 7(2)(a) to (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 result in an invitation to tender being regarded as unlawful in the case where there was no such publication one year prior to the launch of the procedure but the invitation to tender followed a procedure that was, under the second sentence of Article 5(1) of that regulation, in accordance with the Procurement Directives?










3.


If the second question is answered in the affirmative:
Do the rules of EU law governing the award of public contracts preclude national legislation under which the setting-aside of an invitation to tender, as provided for in Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 89/665/EEC, (2) on the ground that it is unlawful by reason of the failure to publish information in accordance with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1370/2007, may be dispensed with if that illegality does not have a significant influence on the outcome of the procurement procedure because the operator concerned was able to react in a timely manner and there was no adverse effect on competition?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70, OJ 2007 L 315, p. 1.

(2)  Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33.
Case T-579/17: Action brought on 28 August 2017 — Wall Street Systems UK v ECB
Date: 2017-08-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrative transparency, award of contract, equal treatment, invitation to tender, tendering








C_2017347EN.01004701.xml










16.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/47





Action brought on 28 August 2017 — Wall Street Systems UK v ECB
(Case T-579/17)
(2017/C 347/62)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Wall Street Systems UK Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Csaki, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare null and void the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) on the contract award to another tenderer in the form of the appeal decision of 17 August 2017, as well as all future decisions related thereto;










—


order the defendant to borne the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following pleas in law.
The applicant is contesting the decision by the defendant regarding the contract award to another tenderer, in the form of the appeal decision of 17 August 2017, with the request for the annulment of this and future associated decisions (particularly any contract award). The aforementioned decision was handed down in breach of Decision (EU) 2016/245 of the European Central Bank (1) and applicable European law, in particular in breach of the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and cost-efficiency.


(1)  Decision (EU) 2016/245 of the European Central Bank of 9 February 2016 laying down the rules on procurement (OJ 2016, L 45, p. 15).