do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-685/15: Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Sulayr Global Service v EUIPO — Sulayr Calidad (sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE — Earlier national word mark SULAYR — Relative ground for refusal — No similarity of the services — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, plastics, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, waste recycling








C_2017424EN.01002901.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/29





Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Sulayr Global Service v EUIPO — Sulayr Calidad (sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE)
(Case T-685/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE - Earlier national word mark SULAYR - Relative ground for refusal - No similarity of the services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))
(2017/C 424/41)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Sulayr Global Service, SL (Valle del Zalabi, Spain) (represented by: P. López Ronda, G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by S. Palmero Cabezas, and subsequently by J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Sulayr Calidad, SL (Grenada, Spain) (represented initially by E. Bayo de Gispert and G. Hinarejos Mulliez, and subsequently by G. Hinarejos Mulliez and I. Valdelomar Serrano, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 September 2015 (Case R 149/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Sulayr Calidad and Sulayr Global Service.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 September 2015 (Case R 149/2015-1) to the extent that it upheld the opposition to registration of the mark applied for in respect of services in Class 40;










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Sulayr Global Service, SL, for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court;










3.


Orders Sulayr Calidad, SL, to bear its own costs for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court and to pay the expenses necessarily incurred by Sulayr Global Service for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.






(1)  OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
Case C-90/16: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) — United Kingdom) — The English Bridge Union Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Exemption for supplies of services closely linked to sport — Concept of ‘sport’ — Activity characterised by a physical element — Duplicate bridge)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, provision of services, sport, tax exemption








C_2017437EN.01000701.xml










18.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 437/7





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) — United Kingdom) — The English Bridge Union Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
(Case C-90/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Exemption for supplies of services closely linked to sport - Concept of ‘sport’ - Activity characterised by a physical element - Duplicate bridge))
(2017/C 437/09)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: The English Bridge Union Limited

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Operative part of the judgment

Article 132(1)(m) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that an activity such as duplicate bridge, which is characterised by a physical element that appears to be negligible, is not covered by the concept of ‘sport’ within the meaning of that provision.


(1)  OJ C 145, 25.4.2016.
Case T-857/16: Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach v EUIPO (Shape of a large glass) (European Union trade mark — International registration designating the European Union — Three-dimensional mark — Shape of a large glass — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive nature — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 2017/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, glass, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017424EN.01003501.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/35





Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach v EUIPO (Shape of a large glass)
(Case T-857/16) (1)

((European Union trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Three-dimensional mark - Shape of a large glass - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive nature - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 2017/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))
(2017/C 424/50)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach GmbH & Co. KG (Erding, Germany) (represented by: A. Hayn, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 September 2016 (Case R 659/2016-2) concerning the international registration designating the European Union of the three-dimensional mark constituted by the shape of a large glass.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Case T-706/16 P: Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — HB v Commission (Appeal — Civil service — Officials — Promotion — 2014 promotion exercise — Comparative consideration of the merits — Discrimination based on sex — Error in law)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, maternity leave, promotion, sexual discrimination, staff assessment








C_2017424EN.01003302.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/33





Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — HB v Commission
(Case T-706/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2014 promotion exercise - Comparative consideration of the merits - Discrimination based on sex - Error in law))
(2017/C 424/48)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: HB (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 21 July 2016, HB v Commission (F-125/15, EU:F:2016:164), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders HB to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission in the context of the present proceedings;










3.


The costs relating to the proceedings at first instance remain allocated in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of the operative part of the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 21 July 2016, HB v Commission (F-125/15).






(1)  OJ C 454, 5.12.2016.
Case C-347/16: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — Balgarska energiyna borsa AD (BEB) v Komisia za energiyno i vodno regulirane (KEVR) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 101 and 102 TFEU — Directive 2009/72/EC — Articles 9, 10, 13 and 14 — Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 — Article 3 — Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011 — Article 2(3) — Regulation (EU) 2015/1222 — Article 1(3) — Certification and designation of an independent transmission system operator — Limitation of the number of holders of electricity transmission licences in national territory)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: domestic market, electrical energy, energy distribution, energy grid, energy law, energy transport, trade licence








C_2017437EN.01001001.xml










18.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 437/10





Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — Balgarska energiyna borsa AD (BEB) v Komisia za energiyno i vodno regulirane (KEVR)
(Case C-347/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 101 and 102 TFEU - Directive 2009/72/EC - Articles 9, 10, 13 and 14 - Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 - Article 3 - Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011 - Article 2(3) - Regulation (EU) 2015/1222 - Article 1(3) - Certification and designation of an independent transmission system operator - Limitation of the number of holders of electricity transmission licences in national territory))
(2017/C 437/13)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad Sofia-grad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Balgarska energiyna borsa AD (BEB)

Defendant: Komisia za energiyno i vodno regulirane (KEVR)

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 9, 10, 13 and 14 of Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC, Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 714/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on conditions for access to the network for cross-border exchanges in electricity and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1228/2003, Article 2(3) in conjunction with recital 3 of Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on wholesale energy market integrity and transparency, and Article 1(3) of Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/1222 of 24 July 2015 establishing a guideline on capacity allocation and congestion management do not preclude, in circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, national legislation limiting the number of holders of electricity transmission licences for a particular territory.


(1)  OJ C 326, 5.9.2016.
Case T-727/17: Action brought on 26 October 2017 — PP and Others v EEAS
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, education grant, equal treatment, legality, pay, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right to education, right to justice, staff regulations (EU)








C_2018022EN.01004501.xml










22.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 22/45





Action brought on 26 October 2017 — PP and Others v EEAS
(Case T-727/17)
(2018/C 022/61)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: PP, PQ and UQ (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service

Form of order sought







—


Declare and rule,






—


the applicants’ calculation sheets of 3 February, 6 February and 20 March 2017 which were sent to them by email by EEAS Human Resources and, insofar as necessary, the salary slips by which payment of the education allowance for their children was granted;










—


and, finally, insofar as necessary, the decision of the Appointing Authority in the form of an email of 15 December 2016 informing them:






—


that the application for reimbursement of the education expenses above the ceiling for type B education allowance in respect of the 2016/2017 academic year was accepted, and










—


that each amount above the ceiling could not in any event exceed EUR 9 704,16;


















—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, raising a plea of illegality inasmuch as the decision taken by the defendant to cap the amount of the reimbursement of education expenses over the statutory ceiling, disputed in the present case, and the note of 15 April 2016 on which that was based and the Guidelines infringe the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and Annex X thereof.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the individual decision is unlawful on the following grounds:






—


infringement of the principles of precaution, legitimate expectations, legal certainty and sound administration and of their acquired rights;










—


infringement of the right to family and the right to education;










—


infringement of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination;










—


failure to weigh up the interests and lack of observance of the principle of proportionality of the measure adopted.
Case T-844/16: Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Alpirsbacher Klosterbräu Glauner v EUIPO (Klosterstoff) (European Union trade mark — Application for EU word mark Klosterstoff — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptiveness — Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public — Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Prior practice of EUIPO)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017424EN.01003401.xml










11.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 424/34





Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Alpirsbacher Klosterbräu Glauner v EUIPO (Klosterstoff)
(Case T-844/16) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for EU word mark Klosterstoff - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Prior practice of EUIPO))
(2017/C 424/49)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Alpirsbacher Klosterbräu Glauner GmbH & Co. KG (Alpirsbach, Germany) (represented by: W. Göpfert and S. Hofmann, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 October 2016 (Case R 2064/2015-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Klosterstoff as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Alpirsbacher Klosterbräu Glauner GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 38,6.2.2017.
Case C-333/17: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga — Portugal) — Caixa Económica Montepio Geral v Carlos Samuel Pimenta Marinho and Others (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Articles 21 and 38 — Non-discrimination — Consumer protection — Contract for a bank loan — Question which does not concern a rule of EU law other than those contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, consumer protection, contract, equal treatment, jurisdiction, loan








C_2018005EN.01001602.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/16





Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga — Portugal) — Caixa Económica Montepio Geral v Carlos Samuel Pimenta Marinho and Others
(Case C-333/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Articles 21 and 38 - Non-discrimination - Consumer protection - Contract for a bank loan - Question which does not concern a rule of EU law other than those contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court))
(2018/C 005/22)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Caixa Económica Montepio Geral

Defendants: Carlos Samuel Pimenta Marinho, Maria de Lurdes Coelho Pimenta Marinho, Daniel Pimenta Marinho, Vera da Conceição Pimenta Marinho

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union manifestly lacks jurisdiction to answer the question referred by the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga (District Court, Braga, Portugal) by decision of 29 March 2017.


(1)  OJ C 256, 07.08.2017
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2017362EN.01000101.xml










26.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 362/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

25 October 2017
(2017/C 362/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1785 




JPY


Japanese yen


134,41 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4429 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88883 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,6858 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1690 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,4383 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,589 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,16 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2355 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5975 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,3970 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5282 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4963 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1971 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7123 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6047 




KRW


South Korean won


1 325,38 




ZAR


South African rand


16,2970 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8317 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5148 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 994,60 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9915 




PHP


Philippine peso


61,039 




RUB


Russian rouble


67,8640 




THB


Thai baht


39,103 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,8134 




MXN


Mexican peso


22,6028 




INR


Indian rupee


76,5140 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Joined Cases C-454/16 P to C-456/16 P to C-458/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 — Global Steel Wire, SA (C-454/16 P), Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA (C-455/16 P), Trefilerías Quijano SA (C-456/16 P), Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL (C-458/16 P) v European Commission (Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European prestressing steel market — Infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Fines — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Paragraph 35 — Ability to pay — New request for a reduction in the amount of the fine on the ground of inability to pay — Letter of rejection — Action brought against that letter — Admissibility)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU competition policy, cartel, control of restrictive practices, financial solvency, fine, rights of the defence, sanction (EU), steel








C_2017437EN.01001301.xml










18.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 437/13





Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 October 2017 — Global Steel Wire, SA (C-454/16 P), Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA (C-455/16 P), Trefilerías Quijano SA (C-456/16 P), Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL (C-458/16 P) v European Commission
(Joined Cases C-454/16 P to C-456/16 P to C-458/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European prestressing steel market - Infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Fines - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Paragraph 35 - Ability to pay - New request for a reduction in the amount of the fine on the ground of inability to pay - Letter of rejection - Action brought against that letter - Admissibility))
(2017/C 437/15)
Language of the cases: Spanish

Parties


Appellants: Global Steel Wire, SA (C-454/16 P), Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA (C-455/16 P), Trefilerías Quijano SA (C-456/16 P), Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL (C-458/16 P) (represented by: F. González Díaz, A. Tresandi Blanco and V. Romero Algarra, abogados)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeals;










2.


Orders Global Steel Wire SA, Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías SA, Trefilerías Quijano SA and Trenzas y Cables de Acero PSC SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.
Corrigendum to the Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Council Directive 89/686/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to personal protective equipment (OJ C 344, 13.10.2017)
Date: 2017-10-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cenelec, European Committee for Standardisation, European standard, harmonisation of standards, marketing standard, protective equipment, safety standard, technical specification, technical standard








C_2017362EN.01003801.xml










26.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 362/38





Corrigendum to the Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Council Directive 89/686/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to personal protective equipment
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 344 of 13 October 2017
)
(2017/C 362/06)
On page 4, Standard ‘EN 207:2017, Personal eye-protection equipment — Filters and eye-protectors against laser radiation (laser eye-protectors)’, fifth column:

for:

‘30.9.2017’,


read:

‘30.10.2017’;

on page 10, Standard ‘EN 566:2017, Mountaineering equipment — Slings — Safety requirements and test methods’, fifth column:

for:

‘30.9.2017’,


read:

‘30.10.2017’;

on page 10, Standard ‘EN 568:2015, Mountaineering equipment — Ice anchors — Safety requirements and test methods’, fifth column:

for:

‘31.5.2016’,


read:

‘9.9.2016’;

on page 11, Standard ‘EN 943-1:2015, Protective clothing against dangerous solid, liquid and gaseous chemicals, including liquid and solid aerosols — Part 1: Performance requirements for Type 1 (gas-tight) chemical protective suits’, fifth column:

for:

‘29.2.2016’,


read:

‘9.9.2016’;

on page 11, Standard ‘EN 958:2017, Mountaineering equipment — Energy absorbing systems for use in klettersteig (via ferrata) climbing — Safety requirements and test methods’, fifth column:

for:

‘30.9.2017’,


read:

‘13.10.2017’;

on page 15, Standard ‘EN ISO 12127-1:2015, Clothing for protection against heat and flame — Determination of contact heat transmission through protective clothing or constituent materials — Part 1: Contact heat produced by heating cylinder (ISO 12127-1:2015)’, fifth column:

for:

‘30.6.2016’,


read:

‘9.9.2016’.