do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-211/14 RENV: Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Klement v OHIM — Bullerjan (Form of an oven) (European Union trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Three-dimensional EU trade mark — Form of an oven — Genuine use of a mark — Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1), and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Nature of use of the mark — Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character)
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, furnace, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017402EN.01002101.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/21





Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Klement v OHIM — Bullerjan (Form of an oven)
(Case T-211/14 RENV) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Three-dimensional EU trade mark - Form of an oven - Genuine use of a mark - Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1), and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Nature of use of the mark - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character))
(2017/C 402/27)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Toni Klement (Dippoldiswalde, Germany) (represented by J. Weiser, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by A. Schifko and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bullerjan GmbH (Isernhagen-Kirchhorst, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 January 2014 (Case R 927/2013-1) relating to revocation proceedings between Mr Klement and Bullerjan

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Toni Klement to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) before the General Court and the Court of Justice.






(1)  OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8619 — Bridgepoint/Miller Homes) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, real estate business








C_2017339EN.01000102.xml










10.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8619 — Bridgepoint/Miller Homes)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2017/C 339/02)
On 22 September 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 32017M8619. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Council Decision of 10 October 2017 adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 5 of the European Union for the financial year 2017
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: amending budget, budgetary expenditure, budgetary resources, commitment of expenditure, draft budget (EU), emergency aid, financial year, fund (EU), general budget (EU), sustainable development








C_2017348EN.01000401.xml










17.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 348/4





COUNCIL DECISION
of 10 October 2017
adopting the Council’s position on draft amending budget No 5 of the European Union for the financial year 2017
(2017/C 348/06)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 314 thereof, in conjunction with the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (1) and in particular Article 41 thereof,
Whereas:






—


the Union’s budget for the financial year 2017 was definitively adopted on 1 December 2016 (2),










—


on 28 July 2017, the Commission submitted a proposal containing draft amending budget No 5 to the general budget for the financial year 2017,




HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
The Council’s position on draft amending budget No 5 of the European Union for the financial year 2017 was adopted on 10 October 2017.
The full text can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the Council’s website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/

Done at Luxembourg, 10 October 2017.


For the Council


The President

T. TÕNISTE




(1)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 51, 28.2.2017, p. 1.
Case T-435/15: Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Kolachi Raj Industrial v Commission (Dumping — Import of bicycles consigned from Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines — Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of bicycles originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/776 — Article 13(2)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Assembly operations — Provenance and origin of bicycle parts — Certificates of origin — Insufficient evidentiary value — Manufacturing costs of bicycle parts)
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Cambodia, China, Pakistan, Philippines, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), originating product, two-wheeled vehicle








C_2017402EN.01002301.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/23





Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Kolachi Raj Industrial v Commission
(Case T-435/15) (1)

((Dumping - Import of bicycles consigned from Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines - Extension to those imports of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of bicycles originating in China - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/776 - Article 13(2)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Assembly operations - Provenance and origin of bicycle parts - Certificates of origin - Insufficient evidentiary value - Manufacturing costs of bicycle parts))
(2017/C 402/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Kolachi Raj Industrial (Private) Ltd (Karachi, Pakistan) (represented by: P. Bentley, QC)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland, M. França and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Bicycle Manufacturers Association (EBMA) (represented by: L. Ruessmann, lawyer, and J. Beck, Solicitor)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/776 of 18 May 2015 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EU) No 502/2013 on imports of bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China to imports of bicycles consigned from Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines, whether declared as originating in Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines or not (OJ 2015, L 122, p. 4), to the extent that it applies to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/776 of 18 May 2015 extending the definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by Council Regulation (EU) No 502/2013 on imports of bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China to imports of bicycles consigned from Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines, whether declared as originating in Cambodia, Pakistan and the Philippines or not, to the extent that it applies to Kolachi Raj Industrial (Private) Ltd;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Kolachi Raj Industrial (Private) Ltd;










3.


Orders the European Bicycle Manufacturers Association (EBMA) to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 5.10.2015.
Council Decision (EU) 2017/1849 of 10 October 2017 amending Decision 1999/70/EC concerning the external auditors of the national central banks, as regards the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European System of Central Banks, Slovakia, accountant, auditing, central bank, euro area




L_2017264EN.01000501.xml










13.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 264/5








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2017/1849
of 10 October 2017
         
amending Decision 1999/70/EC concerning the external auditors of the national central banks, as regards the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Protocol No 4 on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,


Having regard to the Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 8 September 2017 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska (ECB/2017/27) (1),

Whereas:







(1)


The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and of the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are to be audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB's Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.












(2)


The mandate of Národná banka Slovenska's current external auditors, Ernst & Young Slovakia, spol. s r.o., ended after the audit for the financial year 2016. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors for Národná banka Slovenska from the financial year 2017.












(3)


Národná banka Slovenska has selected Deloitte Audit s.r.o. as its external auditors for the financial years 2017 to 2020, with an option to extend the mandate to the financial years 2021 to 2023.












(4)


The Governing Council of the ECB has recommended that Deloitte Audit s.r.o. should be appointed as the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska for the financial years 2017 to 2020.












(5)


Following the recommendation of the Governing Council of the ECB, Council Decision 1999/70/EC (2) should be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 1 of Decision 1999/70/EC, paragraph 16 is replaced by the following:


‘16.   Deloitte Audit s.r.o. is hereby approved as the external auditors of Národná banka Slovenska for the financial years 2017 to 2020.’.




Article 2
This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification.


Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the ECB.




Done at Luxembourg, 10 October 2017.


For the Council


The President

T. TÕNISTE
            





(1)  
            OJ C 310, 19.9.2017, p. 1.

(2)  Council Decision 1999/70/EC of 25 January 1999 concerning the external auditors of the national central banks (OJ L 22, 29.1.1999, p. 69).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2017339EN.01000601.xml










10.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/6





Euro exchange rates (1)

9 October 2017
(2017/C 339/06)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1746 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,36 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4430 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89195 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5348 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1497 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3788 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,893 




HUF


Hungarian forint


312,32 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3077 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5754 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,3636 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5142 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4731 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1685 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6588 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6013 




KRW


South Korean won


1 343,11 




ZAR


South African rand


16,1990 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7788 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5025 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 897,04 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9709 




PHP


Philippine peso


60,189 




RUB


Russian rouble


68,5379 




THB


Thai baht


39,214 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,7168 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,8840 




INR


Indian rupee


76,7625 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-281/16: Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Solelec and Others v Parliament (Public works contracts — Tendering procedure — Electrical work (high-voltage current) as part of the project for the extension and refurbishment of the Parliament’s Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg — Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer and decision to award the contract to another tenderer — Manifest error of assessment — Selection criteria — Technical and professional capacity — Award criteria — Abnormally low tender — Market value)
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, electrical energy, improvement of housing, invitation to tender, works contract








C_2017402EN.01002501.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/25





Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Solelec and Others v Parliament
(Case T-281/16) (1)

((Public works contracts - Tendering procedure - Electrical work (high-voltage current) as part of the project for the extension and refurbishment of the Parliament’s Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg - Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer and decision to award the contract to another tenderer - Manifest error of assessment - Selection criteria - Technical and professional capacity - Award criteria - Abnormally low tender - Market value))
(2017/C 402/32)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Solelec SA (Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg), Mannelli & Associés SA (Bertrange, Luxembourg), Paul Wagner et fils SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) and Socom SA (Foetz, Luxembourg) (represented by S. Marx, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by M. Mraz and L. Chrétien, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment, first, of the Parliament decision of 27 May 2016 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicants in respect of lot No 75 in the context of the tender procedure INLO-D-UPIL-T-14-A04, entitled ‘Electricity — power’ concerning the project to extend and modernise the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg (Luxembourg), and secondly, the decision awarding that lot to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Solelec SA, Mannelli & Associés SA, Paul Wagner et fils SA and Socom SA to pay the costs, including including those incurred in the proceedings for interim measures.






(1)  OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.
Case T-382/16: Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Asna v EUIPO — Wings Software (ASNA WINGS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark ASNA WINGS — Earlier Benelux word mark WINGS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer equipment, consultancy, hire purchase, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2017402EN.01002802.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/28





Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Asna v EUIPO — Wings Software (ASNA WINGS)
(Case T-382/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark ASNA WINGS - Earlier Benelux word mark WINGS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court))
(2017/C 402/36)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Asna, Inc. (San Antonio, Texas, United States) (represented by: J.-B. Devaureix and J. Erdozain López, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Wings Software BVBA (Heist-Op-den-Berg, Belgium) (represented by: C. Dekoninck and J. Bussé, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2016 (Case R 436/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Wings Software and Asna.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Asna, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 335, 12.9.2016.
Case C-589/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña (Spain) lodged on 10 October 2017 — Prenatal S.A. v Tribunal Económico Administrativo Regional de Cataluña (TEARC)
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Jamaica, customs regulations, exemption from customs duties, import (EU), originating product, textile product








C_2018022EN.01001901.xml










22.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 22/19





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña (Spain) lodged on 10 October 2017 — Prenatal S.A. v Tribunal Económico Administrativo Regional de Cataluña (TEARC)
(Case C-589/17)
(2018/C 022/28)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Cataluña

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Prenatal S.A.

Defendant: Tribunal Económico Administrativo Regional de Cataluña (TEARC)

Questions referred







1)


Where an application for remission has been made and the Commission notifies its decision that the case has elements of fact and law similar to a previous case already resolved by the Commission or its decision that there is a comparable case pending resolution, is either of those decisions to be regarded as an act with legal content which is binding on the authorities of the Member State in which application for remission is made and is therefore open to appeal by the person seeking remission [Article 239 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (1)] or requesting that there be no entry in the accounts (Article 220(2)(b) of the Community Customs Code)?










2)


If it is not to be regarded as a Commission decision with binding legal content, is it then for the national authorities to evaluate whether there are comparable elements of fact or law in the case?










3)


In the event of an affirmative reply, if that analysis has been made and led to the conclusion that such elements are not present, is it necessary to apply Article 905(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code and, therefore, must the Commission issue a decision with legal content binding on those national authorities?










4)


In the event of an affirmative reply, does the use of the term ‘the Member State’ in Article 905(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (2) mean that every authority, including the judicial authority, is under an obligation to request the Commission to take a decision?






(1)  OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1.
Case T-714/17: Action brought on 10 October 2017 — Aeris Invest v SRB
Date: 2017-10-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, aid for restructuring, bond, company in difficulties, credit institution, damages, financial solvency, ownership








C_2017437EN.01004201.xml










18.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 437/42





Action brought on 10 October 2017 — Aeris Invest v SRB
(Case T-714/17)
(2017/C 437/49)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Aeris Invest Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: M. Roca Junyent, J. Calvo Costa, R. Vallina Hoset and A. Sellés Marco, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


Declare that the Single Resolution Board has incurred non-contractual liability and order it to repair the harm suffered by the applicant as a result of both its actions and its omissions which deprived the applicant of the BANCO POPULAR ESPAÑOL, S.A. bonds and securities it owned;










—


Order the Board to pay to the applicant by way of compensation for the harm suffered (‘the amount due’);






—


Principally, the reimbursement of EUR 113 022 558,44 for investments made in Banco Popular shares










—


In the alternative, the sum of EUR 93,74 million or










—


In the further alternative, the sum of EUR 54,29 million.














—


Increase the amount due with compensatory interest as of 7 June 2017 until delivery of the judgment disposing of the present case;










—


Increase the amount due with corresponding default interest as of the date of delivery of judgment until its payment in full, at the rate set by the European Central Bank (ECB) for main refinancing operations, increased by two percentage points.










—


Order the SRB to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-659/17 Vallina Fonseca v SRB.