do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2018-01-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2018008EN.01000401.xml










11.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 8/4





Euro exchange rates (1)

10 January 2018
(2018/C 8/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1992 




JPY


Japanese yen


133,62 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4469 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88670 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,8110 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1725 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6448 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,570 




HUF


Hungarian forint


309,92 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1814 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6395 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,5548 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5289 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4931 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,3809 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6654 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5981 




KRW


South Korean won


1 280,95 




ZAR


South African rand


14,9214 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7996 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4493 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 105,86 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8004 




PHP


Philippine peso


60,624 




RUB


Russian rouble


68,3985 




THB


Thai baht


38,506 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,8952 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,1300 




INR


Indian rupee


76,2630 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Public holidays 2018
Date: 2018-01-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, public holiday








C_2018008EN.01001401.xml










11.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 8/14





Public holidays 2018
(2018/C 8/06)






Belgique/België


1.1, 1.4, 2.4, 1.5, 8.5, 10.5, 11.5, 20.5, 21.5, 11.7, 21.7, 15.8, 27.9, 1.11, 2.11, 11.11, 15.11, 25.12, 26.12, 27.12, 28.12, 29.12, 30.12, 31.12




България


1.1, 3.3, 4.3, 5.3, 6.4, 7.4, 8.4, 9.4, 1.5, 6.5, 7.5, 24.5, 6.9, 22.9, 23.9, 24.9, 1.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




Česká republika


1.1, 30.3, 2.4, 1.5, 8.5, 5.7, 6.7, 28.9, 28.10, 17.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




Danmark


1.1, 29.3, 30.3, 1.4, 2.4, 27.4, 10.5, 20.5, 21.5, 5.6, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12, 31.12




Deutschland


1.1, 30.3, 2.4, 1.5, 10.5, 21.5, 3.10, 25.12, 26.12




Eesti


1.1, 24.2, 30.3, 1.4, 1.5, 20.5, 23.6, 24.6, 20.8, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




Éire/Ireland


1.1, 19.3, 30.3, 2.4, 7.5, 4.6, 6.8, 29.10, 25.12, 26.12




Ελλάδα


1.1, 6.1, 19.2, 25.3, 6.4, 9.4, 1.5, 28.5, 15.8, 28.10, 25.12, 26.12




España


1.1, 2.1, 29.3, 30.3, 2.4, 1.5, 9.5, 10.5, 21.5, 1.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12, 27.12, 28.12, 31.12




France


1.1, 2.4, 1.5, 8.5, 10.5, 21.5, 14.7, 15.8, 1.11, 11.11, 25.12




Hrvatska


1.1, 6.1, 1.4, 2.4, 1.5, 31.5, 22.6, 25.6, 5.8, 15.8, 8.10, 1.11, 25.12, 26.12




Italia


1.1, 6.1, 2.4, 25.4, 1.5, 2.6, 15.8, 1.11, 8.12, 25.12, 26.12




Κύπρος/Kıbrıs


1.1, 6.1, 19.2, 25.3, 1.4, 6.4, 9.4, 1.5, 28.5, 15.8, 1.10, 28.10, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




Latvija


1.1, 30.3, 1.4, 2.4, 30.4, 1.5, 4.5, 13.5, 23.6, 24.6, 9.7, 18.11, 19.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12, 31.12




Lietuva


1.1, 16.2, 11.3, 1.4, 1.5, 6.5, 3.6, 24.6, 6.7, 15.8, 1.11, 24.12, 25.12




Luxembourg


1.1, 2.4, 1.5, 10.5, 21.5, 23.6, 15.8, 1.11, 25.12, 26.12




Magyarország


1.1, 15.3, 30.3, 2.4, 1.5, 21.5, 20.8, 23.10, 1.11, 25.12, 26.12




Malta


1.1, 10.2, 19.3, 30.3, 31.3, 1.5, 7.6, 29.6, 15.8, 8.9, 21.9, 8.12, 13.12, 25.12




Nederland


1.1, 1.4, 2.4, 27.4, 10.5, 20.5, 21.5, 25.12, 26.12




Österreich


1.1, 6.1, 1.4, 2.4, 1.5, 10.5, 20.5, 21.5, 31.5, 15.8, 26.10, 1.11, 8.12, 25.12, 26.12




Polska


1.1, 6.1, 1.4, 2.4, 1.5, 3.5, 31.5, 15.8, 1.11, 11.11, 25.12, 26.12




Portugal


1.1, 30.3, 1.4, 25.4, 1.5, 31.5, 10.6, 15.8, 5.10, 1.11, 1.12, 8.12, 25.12




România


1.1, 2.1, 24.1, 8.4, 9.4, 1.5, 27.5, 28.5, 1.6, 15.8, 30.11, 1.12, 25.12, 26.12




Slovenija


1.1, 2.1, 8.2, 1.4, 2.4, 27.4, 1.5, 2.5, 25.6, 15.8, 31.10, 1.11, 25.12, 26.12




Slovensko


1.1, 6.1, 30.3, 2.4, 1.5, 8.5, 5.7, 29.8, 1.9, 15.9, 1.11, 17.11, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




Suomi/Finland


1.1, 30.3, 2.4, 1.5, 10.5, 22.6, 6.12, 24.12, 25.12, 26.12




Sverige


1.1, 6.1, 30.3, 1.4, 2.4, 1.5, 10.5, 20.5, 6.6, 23.6, 3.11, 25.12, 26.12




United Kingdom


Wales and England: 1.1, 30.3, 2.4, 7.5, 28.5, 27.8, 25.12, 26.12
Northern Ireland: 1.1, 17.3, 19.3, 30.3, 2.4, 7.5, 28.5, 12.7, 27.8, 25.12, 26.12
Scotland: 1.1, 2.1, 30.3, 7.5, 28.5, 6.8, 30.11, 25.12, 26.12
Case C-21/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt (Sweden) lodged on 11 January 2018 — Textilis Ltd, Ozgur Keskin v Svenskt Tenn Aktiebolag
Date: 2018-01-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018094EN.01001301.xml










12.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 94/13





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt (Sweden) lodged on 11 January 2018 — Textilis Ltd, Ozgur Keskin v Svenskt Tenn Aktiebolag
(Case C-21/18)
(2018/C 094/16)
Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Svea hovrätt

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Textilis Ltd, Ozgur Keskin

Defendant: Svenskt Tenn Aktiebolag

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 4 of the European Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 (1) of 16 December 2015 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark, etc., to be interpreted as meaning that Article 7(1)(e)(iii), in its new wording, is applicable to a court’s assessment of invalidity (under Article 52(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Regulation) that is made after the entry into force of the amendment, namely after 23 March 2016, even if the action concerns a declaration of invalidity where the action was brought before that date and therefore concerns a trade mark registered before that date?










2.


Is Article 7(1)(e)(iii) of the Trade Marks Regulation, in the version applicable, to be interpreted as meaning that its scope covers a sign which consists of the two-dimensional representation of a two-dimensional product, for example fabric decorated with the sign in question?










3.


If the answer to question 2 is in the affirmative, according to what principles is the wording ‘signs which consist exclusively of the shape (or another characteristic) which gives substantial value to the goods’ in Article 7(1)(e)(iii) of the Trade Marks Regulation to be interpreted, in a situation where the registration covers a wide range of classes of goods and goods and the sign may be affixed in different ways to the goods? Is the assessment to be made in accordance with more objective/general criteria, for example with the starting point of how the mark appears and how it is possible to affix it to different goods, that is to say without regard to the manner in which the trade mark proprietor may de facto have affixed or may intend to affix the sign to various goods?






(1)  OJ 2015 L 341, p. 21.
Case T-12/18: Action brought on 11 January 2018 — Zweirad-Center Stadler v EUIPO — Triumph Designs (Triumph)
Date: 2018-01-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cycle and motorcycle industry, registered trade mark, road safety, sports equipment, trade-mark law, two-wheeled vehicle, vehicle parts








C_2018072EN.01004702.xml










26.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/47





Action brought on 11 January 2018 — Zweirad-Center Stadler v EUIPO — Triumph Designs (Triumph)
(Case T-12/18)
(2018/C 072/61)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Zweirad-Center Stadler GmbH (Regensburg, Germany) (represented by: P. Ruess and A. Doepner-Thiele, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Triumph Designs Ltd (Swadlincote, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘Triumph’ — Application for registration No 6 717 672

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 November 2017 in Case R 665/2017-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision to the extent that it refused the trade mark application for the goods in classes 9, 12 and 25;










—


reject the opposition in its entirety and allow the trade mark to be registered for those goods, or, in the alternative, refer the case back to EUIPO in order that it may adopt the consequent measures;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case C-22/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Darmstadt (Germany) lodged on 11 January 2018 — TopFit e. V., Daniele Biffi v Deutscher Leichtathletikverband e. V.
Date: 2018-01-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: discrimination on the basis of nationality, sporting event, sports body








C_2018123EN.01001201.xml










9.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 123/12





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Darmstadt (Germany) lodged on 11 January 2018 — TopFit e. V., Daniele Biffi v Deutscher Leichtathletikverband e. V.
(Case C-22/18)
(2018/C 123/17)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Darmstadt

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: TopFit e. V., Daniele Biffi

Defendant: Deutscher Leichtathletikverband e. V.

Questions referred







1.


Are Articles 18, 21 and 165 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that a provision in the Athletics Rules of an association of a Member State which makes participation in national championships dependent on having the nationality of the Member State amounts to impermissible discrimination?










2.


Are Articles 18, 21 and 165 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that an association of a Member State impermissibly discriminates against amateur athletes who do not have the nationality of the Member State by allowing them to participate in national championships but only letting them start ‘outside classification’ or ‘without classification’ and not letting them participate in the finals of races and contests?










3.


Are Articles 18, 21 and 165 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that an association of a Member State impermissibly discriminates against amateur athletes who do not have the nationality of the Member State by excluding them from the award of national titles or from the standings?