do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-720/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 28 December 2017 — Mohammed Bilali
Date: 2017-12-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to refugees, foreign national, refugee, right of asylum, stateless person








C_2018104EN.01001601.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/16





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 28 December 2017 — Mohammed Bilali
(Case C-720/17)
(2018/C 104/20)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Mohammed Bilali

Respondent authority: Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl

Question referred

Do the provisions of EU law, in particular Article 19(3) of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 (1) (the Qualification Directive), preclude a national provision of a Member State concerning the possibility of revocation of subsidiary protection status pursuant to which subsidiary protection status may be revoked without a change in the factual circumstances themselves which are relevant for the purpose of granting that status, but rather only where the state of knowledge of the authority in this regard has undergone a change, and, in that context, without either a misrepresentation or an omission of facts on the part of the third-country national or stateless person having been a determinant factor in the granting of the subsidiary protection status?


(1)  Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-12-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2017445EN.01001001.xml










28.12.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 445/10





Euro exchange rates (1)

27 December 2017
(2017/C 445/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1895 




JPY


Japanese yen


134,70 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4450 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88593 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,8727 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1772 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,8605 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,840 




HUF


Hungarian forint


310,99 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1884 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6499 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,5475 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5316 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5028 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,2953 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6825 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5937 




KRW


South Korean won


1 277,73 




ZAR


South African rand


14,8108 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7975 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5398 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 123,38 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8481 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,430 




RUB


Russian rouble


68,5974 




THB


Thai baht


39,027 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,9196 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,5221 




INR


Indian rupee


76,3125 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-837/17: Action brought on 28 December 2017 — Negru v EUIPO — Sky (SkyPrivate)
Date: 2017-12-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, consultancy, electronic commerce, electronic money, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2018072EN.01004301.xml










26.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/43





Action brought on 28 December 2017 — Negru v EUIPO — Sky (SkyPrivate)
(Case T-837/17)
(2018/C 072/54)
Language in which the application was lodged: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Alexandru Negru (Iaşi, Romania) (represented by: I.-M. Iliescu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sky plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘Skyprivate’

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 October 2017 in Case R 349/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-730/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 28 December 2017 — Edward Reich, Debora Lieber, Ella Reich, Ezra Bernard Reich v Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV
Date: 2017-12-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, consumer protection, indemnification, rail transport








C_2018104EN.01001701.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/17





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 28 December 2017 — Edward Reich, Debora Lieber, Ella Reich, Ezra Bernard Reich v Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV
(Case C-730/17)
(2018/C 104/22)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Edward Reich, Debora Lieber, Ella Reich, Ezra Bernard Reich

Defendant: Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV

Question referred

Are Articles 3, 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (1) (‘Regulation No 261/2004’) to be interpreted as meaning that — in the case where an operating Community air carrier, for the purposes of Regulation No 261/2004, concludes a contract for the carriage of passengers by air with consumers that includes a train journey from a railway station located in the territory of a Member State in which those consumers reside to an airport located in the territory of a second Member State from which the consumers will take their flight to their final destination, namely an airport located in the territory of a non-Member country, and those consumers have no legal connection with the company carrying out the train journey but the air carrier clearly has agreements with that company, and there was a long delay in the train journey, which is included in the contract, that resulted in those consumers being unable to catch their flight from the airport located in the territory of the second Member State — those consumers may rely on the rights provided for by Regulation No 261/2004 and demand compensation in accordance with Articles 5, 6 and 7 of that regulation?


(1)  OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.