do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
European Parliament decision of 17 January 2018 on the nomination of Eva Lindström as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C8-0401/2017 — 2017/0819(NLE))
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, European Parliament
Subjects: appointment of members, member of the Court of Auditors (EU)








C_2018458EN.01022401.xml










19.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 458/224






P8_TA(2018)0007
Nomination of a Member of the Court of Auditors — Eva Lindström
European Parliament decision of 17 January 2018 on the nomination of Eva Lindström as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C8-0401/2017 — 2017/0819(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2018/C 458/13)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0401/2017),










—


having regard to Rule 121 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8-0003/2018),










A.


whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










B.


whereas at its meeting of 11 January 2018 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;












1.


Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Eva Lindström as a Member of the Court of Auditors;












2.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 726/2004 as regards the location of the seat of the European Medicines Agency’ (COM(2017) 735 final — 2017/0328 (COD))
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: European Medicines Agency, European Union membership, United Kingdom, offshoring, operation of the Institutions








C_2018197EN.01007101.xml










8.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 197/71





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 726/2004 as regards the location of the seat of the European Medicines Agency’
(COM(2017) 735 final — 2017/0328 (COD))
(2018/C 197/11)






Consultation


European Parliament, 11.12.2017
Council, 14.12.2017




Legal basis


Articles 114, 168(4)(c) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Single Market, Production and Consumption




Adopted in plenary


17.1.2018




Plenary session No


531




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


167/0/0




Since the Committee endorses the contents of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 531st plenary session, held on 17 and 18 January 2018 (meeting of 17 January), unanimously to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 17 January 2018.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Georges DASSIS
Special Report No 2/2018 — ‘The operational efficiency of the ECB’s crisis management for banks’
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: European Central Bank, European System of Central Banks, anti-crisis plan, audit, bank, banking supervision, euro area, law of banking, monetary crisis








C_2018015EN.01000501.xml










17.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 15/5





Special Report No 2/2018
‘The operational efficiency of the ECB’s crisis management for banks’
(2018/C 15/05)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 2/2018 ‘The operational efficiency of the ECB’s crisis management for banks’ 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-15/18: Action brought on 17 January 2018 — OCU v ECB
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, access to EU information, aid to undertakings, bank, company in difficulties, disclosure of information, rights of the defence








C_2018083EN.01002201.xml










5.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 83/22





Action brought on 17 January 2018 — OCU v ECB
(Case T-15/18)
(2018/C 083/33)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios (OCU) (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Martínez Martínez and C. López-Mélida de Ramón, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the contested decision.










—


Order the ECB to disclose to the applicant the full or confidential version of the documents.










—


Order the ECB to pay the costs incurred.





Pleas in law and main arguments

This action seeks the annulment of the Decision of 17 November 2017, registered under number LS/MD/17/428, dismissing the applicant’s ‘confirmatory application for access to ECB documents’ of 14 September 2017 and an order for the disclosure of the documents requested, relating to the resolution of the institution Banco Popular Español S.A.
In support of its action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, based on the fundamental right set out in Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, namely the right to good administration, in the form of access to documents for the proper exercise of the right of defence.
Case C-30/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia (Spain) lodged on 17 January 2018 — Cobra Servicios Auxiliares, S.A. v José Ramón Fiuza Asorey and Incatema, S.L.
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: collective dismissal, equal treatment, severance pay, temporary employment, work contract








C_2018142EN.01002501.xml










23.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/25





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia (Spain) lodged on 17 January 2018 — Cobra Servicios Auxiliares, S.A. v José Ramón Fiuza Asorey and Incatema, S.L.
(Case C-30/18)
(2018/C 142/33)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Cobra Servicios Auxiliares, S.A.

Respondents: José Ramón Fiuza Asorey and Incatema, S.L.

Questions referred







(1)


Must Clause 4 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work contained in the Annex to Directive 1999/70 (1) be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, in respect of the same set of facts (the termination of a contract for services (contrata) between the employer and a third-party undertaking at the latter’s instigation), provides for a lower level of compensation for (i) termination of a fixed-term contract (contrato) for a specific task or service with a term of the same duration as that of the contract between the employer and the third-party undertaking than it does for (ii) termination of the permanent contracts of comparable workers under a collective redundancy that is justified on production-related grounds pertaining to the employer and arises from the termination of the contract between the employer and the third-party undertaking?










(2)


If the answer is in the affirmative, is the unequal treatment between workers on fixed-term contracts and comparable permanent workers as regards compensation for termination of contract in cases where termination is prompted by the same factual circumstances but based on different legal grounds to be considered to constitute discrimination of the type prohibited in Article 21 of the Charter, inasmuch as it is contrary to the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination in Articles 20 and 21 of the Charter, which form part of the general principles of EU law?






(1)  Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43).
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical process, chemical product, health control, health risk, inorganic acid, market approval, marketing standard








C_2018015EN.01000301.xml










17.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 15/3





Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006
 (1)
)

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 15/03)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation number


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2018) 15


10 January 2018


Acids generated from chromium trioxide and their oligomers
EC No 231-801-5
CAS No 7738-94-5


Robert Bosch GmbH, Robert Bosch Platz 1, 70839 Gerlingen-Schillerhöhe, Germany


REACH/17/35/0


Hard chrome plating for gasoline and diesel injection applications


21 September 2029


In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies for the applicant before the sunset date






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Case T-68/16: Judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2018 — Deichmann v EUIPO — Munich (Representation of a cross on the side of a sports shoe) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark representing a cross on the side of a sports shoe — Position mark — Genuine use of the mark — Articles 15(1) and 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18(1) and 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2018072EN.01003202.xml










26.2.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 72/32





Judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2018 — Deichmann v EUIPO — Munich (Representation of a cross on the side of a sports shoe)
(Case T-68/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark representing a cross on the side of a sports shoe - Position mark - Genuine use of the mark - Articles 15(1) and 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18(1) and 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))
(2018/C 072/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Deichmann SE (Essen, Germany) (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Munich, SL (Capellades, Spain) (represented by: J. Güell Serra and M. del Mar Guix Vilanova, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2015 (Case R 2345/2014-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Deichman and Munich.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Deichmann SE to pay the costs of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and of Munich, SL.






(1)  OJ C 111, 29.3.2016.
Case C-28/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 17 January 2018 — Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Deutsche Bahn AG
Date: 2018-01-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electronic banking, electronic money, payment, payment system, residence








C_2018104EN.01002201.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/22





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 17 January 2018 — Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Deutsche Bahn AG
(Case C-28/18)
(2018/C 104/28)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Verein für Konsumenteninformation

Defendant: Deutsche Bahn AG

Question referred

Must Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euro and amending Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 (the SEPA Regulation) (1) be interpreted to mean that the payee is prohibited from making payment under the SEPA direct debit scheme dependent on the payer’s place of residence being in the Member State in which the payee also has his establishment (residence), if payment in a different way, for example with a credit card, is also allowed?


(1)  OJ 2012 L 94, p. 22.