do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 November 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion on behalf of the Union of the Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and New Zealand, of the other part (15470/2016 — C8-0027/2017 — 2016/0366(NLE))
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: New Zealand, cooperation agreement (EU), cooperation policy, ratification of an agreement








C_2018356EN.01015601.xml










4.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 356/156






P8_TA(2017)0446
EU-New Zealand Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation (Consent)***
European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 November 2017 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion on behalf of the Union of the Partnership Agreement on Relations and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and New Zealand, of the other part (15470/2016 — C8-0027/2017 — 2016/0366(NLE))
(Consent)
(2018/C 356/33)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (15470/2016),










—


having regard to the draft Partnership Agreement on relations and cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and New Zealand, of the other part (09787/2016),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 37 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 207, Article 212(1) , Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 218(8), second subparagraph, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0027/2017),










—


having regard to its non-legislative resolution of 16 November 2017 on the draft decision (1),










—


having regard to Rule 99(1) and (4) and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0327/2017),












1.


Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of New Zealand.






(1)  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0447.
Case C-250/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 November 2017 — Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH v European Commission (Appeal — Arbitration clause — Sixth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2002-2006) — Partial repayment of the sums paid to the appellant — Liquidated damages)
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, damages, reimbursement of aid








C_2018022EN.01000902.xml










22.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 22/9





Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 November 2017 — Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH v European Commission
(Case C-250/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Arbitration clause - Sixth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2002-2006) - Partial repayment of the sums paid to the appellant - Liquidated damages))
(2018/C 022/11)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH (represented by: M. Núñez Müller, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and F. Moro, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Special Report No 16/2017 — ‘Rural Development Programming: less complexity and more focus on results needed’
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EAFRD, EU programme, EU regional policy, aid to agriculture, financial aid, rural development, rural region








C_2017386EN.01000501.xml










16.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 386/5





Special Report No 16/2017
‘Rural Development Programming: less complexity and more focus on results needed’
(2017/C 386/05)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 16/2017 ‘Rural Development Programming: less complexity and more focus on results needed’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://eca.europa.eu
Case T-723/16: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Mapei v EUIPO — Steenfabrieken Vandersanden (RE-CONzerø) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark RE-CONzerø — Earlier EU word mark ZERO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001))
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, chemical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018005EN.01003901.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/39





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Mapei v EUIPO — Steenfabrieken Vandersanden (RE-CONzerø)
(Case T-723/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark RE-CONzerø - Earlier EU word mark ZERO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001)))
(2018/C 005/52)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Mapei SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: initially, F. Caricato and, subsequently, M. Fazzini, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Steenfabrieken Vandersanden NV (Bilzen, Belgium) (represented by: J. Muyldermans and P. Maeyaert, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 July 2016 (Case R 2374/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Steenfabrieken Vandersanden and Mapei.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mapei SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 462, 12.12.2016.
Case T-419/16: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Carrera Brands v EUIPO — Autec (Carrera) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark Carrera — Article 56(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 63(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Admissibility of the application for revocation — Non-challenge agreement — Decisions of the national courts — Abuse of rights — Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1)(a) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430) — Application for suspension of the proceedings before EUIPO)
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, household article, household electrical appliance, measuring equipment, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018005EN.01003301.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/33





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Carrera Brands v EUIPO — Autec (Carrera)
(Case T-419/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark Carrera - Article 56(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 63(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Admissibility of the application for revocation - Non-challenge agreement - Decisions of the national courts - Abuse of rights - Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1)(a) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430) - Application for suspension of the proceedings before EUIPO))
(2018/C 005/43)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Carrera Brands Ltd (Hong Kong, China) (represented by: C. Markowsky, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Autec AG (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: C. Früchtl, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 June 2016 (Case R 278/2015-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Autec and Carrera Brands.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Carrera Brands Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 343, 19.9.2016.
Case T-229/15: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EBA (Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Provision of interim staff for IT services — Rejection of a tenderer’s bid — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, information technology profession, services contract, temporary employment, tendering








C_2018005EN.01002701.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/27





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EBA
(Case T-229/15) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Provision of interim staff for IT services - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment))
(2018/C 005/36)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) and European Dynamics Belgium SA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: I. Ampazis, M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, then M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Banking Authority (EBA) (represented by: J. Overett Somnier, J. Mifsud and S. Giordano, acting as Agents, assisted by H.-G. Kamann and A. Dritsa, lawyers)

Re:

First, an action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the EBA of 2 March 2015 rejecting the applicants’ tender submitted in response to the restricted tendering procedure EBA/2014/06/OPS/SER/RT with respect to Lot 1, titled ‘Supply of interim staff: Supply of interim staff for Information Technology’ and, second, an action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for harm that the applicants allegedly suffered following that decision as a result of the loss of opportunity to be ranked in first place in the cascade the contract award procedure at issue, amounting to EUR 300 000, together with interest

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE and European Dynamics Belgium SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 262, 10.8.2015
Case C-476/16: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte — Croatia) — Hrvatska agencija za civilno zrakoplovstvo v Air Serbia A.D. Beograd, Dane Kondić (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Whether the body making a reference is a ‘court or tribunal’ — Independence — Manifest Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, courts and tribunals, ministry, right of action








C_2018032EN.01000501.xml










29.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 32/5





Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte — Croatia) — Hrvatska agencija za civilno zrakoplovstvo v Air Serbia A.D. Beograd, Dane Kondić
(Case C-476/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Whether the body making a reference is a ‘court or tribunal’ - Independence - Manifest Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling))
(2018/C 032/06)
Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Hrvatska agencija za civilno zrakoplovstvo

Defendant: Air Serbia A.D. Beograd, Dane Kondić

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte (Ministry of Maritime Affairs, Transport and Infrastructure — Directorate for Air Transport, Electronic Communications and Postal Services, Croatia), by decision of 26 August 2016, is manifestly inadmissible.


(1)  OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.
Case T-722/16: Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Mapei v EUIPO — Steenfabrieken Vandersanden (zerø) (EU trademark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark zerø — Earlier EU word mark ZERO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, chemical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018005EN.01003801.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/38





Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Mapei v EUIPO — Steenfabrieken Vandersanden (zerø)
(Case T-722/16) (1)

((EU trademark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark zerø - Earlier EU word mark ZERO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))
(2018/C 005/51)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Mapei SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: F. Caricato, then M. Fazzini, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Steenfabrieken Vandersanden NV (Bilzen, Belgium) (represented by: J. Muyldermans and P. Maeyaert, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 July 2016 (Case R 2371/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Steenfabrieken Vandersanden and Mapei.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the action;










2.


orders Mapei SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 462, 12.12.2016
Case C-308/16: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Kozuba Premium Selection sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 12(1) and (2) — Article 135(1)(j) — Taxable transactions — Exemption for the supply of buildings — Concept of ‘first occupation’ — Concept of ‘conversion’)
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, improvement of housing, real property, supply, tax exemption, tax harmonisation








C_2018022EN.01001102.xml










22.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 22/11





Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny — Poland) — Kozuba Premium Selection sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie
(Case C-308/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 12(1) and (2) - Article 135(1)(j) - Taxable transactions - Exemption for the supply of buildings - Concept of ‘first occupation’ - Concept of ‘conversion’))
(2018/C 022/14)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Kozuba Premium Selection sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 12(1)(a) and 135(1)(j) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding a national law, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which makes the VAT exemption on the supply of buildings subject to the condition that the first occupation thereof arises in the context of a taxable transaction. The same provisions must be interpreted as not precluding such a national law from making that exemption subject to the condition, in the case of the ‘upgrade’ of an existing building, that the costs incurred have not exceeded 30 % of the initial value thereof, provided that that concept of ‘upgrade’ is interpreted in the same way as that of ‘conversion’ in Article 12(2) of Directive 2006/112, namely as meaning that the building concerned must have been subject to substantial modifications intended to modify the use or alter considerably the conditions of occupation.


(1)  OJ C 335, 12.9.2016.
Notice of open competition
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), economics, macroeconomics








C_2017386EN.01000901.xml










16.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 386/9





NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION
(2017/C 386/07)
The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:






 



EPSO/AD/339/17 — ADMINISTRATORS (AD 7) in the following fields:







1.



FINANCIAL ECONOMICS











2.



MACROECONOMICS









The competition notice is published in 24 languages in 
Official Journal of the European Union
C 386 A of 16 November 2017
.
Further information can be found on the EPSO website: https://epso.europa.eu/
Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2180 of 16 November 2017 extending the period of validity of Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412 authorising Member States to provide for a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Council Directive 2000/29/EC in respect of ash wood originating or processed in Canada (notified under document C(2017) 7488)
Date: 2017-11-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety, European Commission
Subjects: Canada, EU Member State, derogation from EU law, import (EU), plant disease, plant health control, surveillance concerning imports, wood product








L_2017307EN.01005701.xml










23.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 307/57








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2017/2180
of 16 November 2017
         
extending the period of validity of Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412 authorising Member States to provide for a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Council Directive 2000/29/EC in respect of ash wood originating or processed in Canada


(notified under document C(2017) 7488)




THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (1), and in particular the first indent of Article 15(1) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412 (2) allows Member States to authorise, by way of derogation from Article 5(1) of Directive 2000/29/EC, and in conjunction with point 2.3 of Section I of Part A of Annex IV to that Directive, the introduction into the Union of ash (Fraxinus L.) wood originating in Canada subject to certain conditions.












(2)


Since the circumstances justifying that authorisation still apply and there is no new information giving cause for revision of the specific conditions, that authorisation should be extended.












(3)


Based on the experience gained with the application of Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412, it is appropriate to extend the authorisation for one year.












(4)


Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412 should therefore be amended accordingly.












(5)


The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
In Article 5 of Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412, the date ‘31 December 2017’ is replaced by ‘31 December 2018’.


Article 2
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.




Done at Brussels, 16 November 2017.


For the Commission

Vytenis ANDRIUKAITIS
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/412 of 17 March 2016 authorising Member States to provide for a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Council Directive 2000/29/EC in respect of ash wood originating or processed in Canada (OJ L 74, 19.3.2016, p. 41).