do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-436/18: Order of the General Court of 23 January 2019 — Prigent v Commission (Action for annulment — Decision to take no further action on a complaint — Refusal of the Commission to bring infringement proceedings — Act not open to challenge — No direct concern — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, admissibility, anti-discriminatory measure, complaint to the Commission, equal treatment, general legal principle, health insurance, pension scheme, self-employed person, social-security contribution








C_2019093EN.01006202.xml










11.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 93/62






Order of the General Court of 23 January 2019 — Prigent v Commission
(Case T-436/18) (1)

((Action for annulment - Decision to take no further action on a complaint - Refusal of the Commission to bring infringement proceedings - Act not open to challenge - No direct concern - Inadmissibility))
(2019/C 93/82)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Claude Prigent (Caudan, France) (represented by: A. Bove, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Commission of 23 May 2018 not to take any further action on the applicant’s complaint seeking a declaration that the French authorities infringed Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ 2009 L 335, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Mr Claude Prigent shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.
Notice for the attention of a person subject to restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/101/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Zimbabwe, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, trade restriction








C_2018023EN.01000601.xml










23.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 23/6





Notice for the attention of a person subject to restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/101/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe
(2018/C 23/06)
The following information is brought to the attention of Mr Robert Gabriel Mugabe who appears in Annex I to Council Decision 2011/101/CFSP (1) concerning restrictive measures against Zimbabwe and in Annex III to Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 (2) concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe.
The Council is considering maintaining the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned person with a new statement of reasons. The above-mentioned person is hereby informed that he may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statement of reasons for his designation, before 29 January 2018, to the following address:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




DG C 1C




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu




The person concerned may submit at any time a request to the Council, together with any supporting documentation, that the decision to include and maintain him on the list should be reconsidered, to the address provided above. Such request will be considered when it is received. In this respect, the attention of the person concerned is drawn to the regular review by the Council of the list. In order for a request to be considered at the next review, it should be submitted by 12 February 2018.


(1)  OJ L 42, 16.2.2011, p. 6.

(2)  OJ L 55, 24.2.2004, p. 1.
Case T-869/16: Judgment of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — Wenger v EUIPO — Swissgear (SWISSGEAR) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark SWISSGEAR — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 52(1)(a) and Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and Article 95 of Regulation 2017/1001))
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, clothing, leather, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile product, trade-mark law, vehicle








C_2018083EN.01002002.xml










5.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 83/20





Judgment of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — Wenger v EUIPO — Swissgear (SWISSGEAR)
(Case T-869/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark SWISSGEAR - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 52(1)(a) and Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and Article 95 of Regulation 2017/1001)))
(2018/C 083/31)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Wenger SA (Delémont, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Ikas and A. Sulovsky, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Swissgear Sàrl (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Hacke, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 September 2016 (Case R 2098/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Swissgear and Wenger.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Wenger SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Swissgear Sàrl.






(1)  OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Case T-30/18: Action brought on 23 January 2018 — Yado v EUIPO — Dvectis CZ (seat cushion)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, medical device








C_2018094EN.01003401.xml










12.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 94/34





Action brought on 23 January 2018 — Yado v EUIPO — Dvectis CZ (seat cushion)
(Case T-30/18)
(2018/C 094/45)
Language in which the application was lodged: Slovak

Parties


Applicant: Yado s.r.o. (Handlová, Slovakia) (represented by: D. Futej, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Dvectis CZ s.r.o. (Brno, Czech Republic)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the design at issue: Applicant

Design at issue: European Union design No 2 371 591-0001

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 November 2017 in Case R 1017/2017-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision declaring the appeal inadmissible;










—


order the defendant to deal with the appeal and give a ruling thereon;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the present proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Error in law for the purpose of Article 57 of Regulation No 6/2002 and Article 65 of Regulation No 2245/2002;










—


Infringement of the applicant’s fundamental right to be heard;










—


Infringement of Article 7 of Regulation No 6/2002
Case T-846/16: Order of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — QF v Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Aid granted by the Spanish authorities to certain professional football clubs — Preferential tax rate applied in connection with corporate tax — Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market — No interest in bringing proceedings — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, corporation tax, professional sport, sports body, tax relief








C_2018104EN.01004201.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/42





Order of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — QF v Commission
(Case T-846/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - State aid - Aid granted by the Spanish authorities to certain professional football clubs - Preferential tax rate applied in connection with corporate tax - Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market - No interest in bringing proceedings - Manifest inadmissibility))
(2018/C 104/54)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: QF (represented by: L. Ruiz Ezquerra, R. Oncina Borrego, I. Sobrepera Millet and A. Hernández Pardo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 4046 final of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.29769 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by Spain for certain football clubs.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for a decision that there is no need to adjudicate is dismissed.










2.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










3.


There is no longer any need to rule on the applications to intervene submitted by the Kingdom of Spain and Fútbol Club Barcelona.










4.


QF shall pay the costs.










5.


QF, the European Commission, the Kingdom of Spain and Fútbol Club Barcelona shall each bear their own respective costs relating to the applications to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 53, 20.2.2017.
Case T-33/18: Action brought on 23 January 2018 — Pracsis and Conceptexpo Project v Commission and EACEA
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, indemnification, rights of the defence, tendering, transparency in decision-making








C_2018112EN.01003701.xml










26.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/37





Action brought on 23 January 2018 — Pracsis and Conceptexpo Project v Commission and EACEA
(Case T-33/18)
(2018/C 112/48)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Pracsis SPRL (Brussels, Belgium) and Conceptexpo Project (Wavre, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission and Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA)

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:






—


declare the action admissible and well founded;










—


annul the contested decisions, in that they designate Cecoforma as the successful tenderer for the framework contract of the call for tenders EACEA/2017/01, and annul the contract signed between EACEA and Cecoforma;










—


order the European Commission and EACEA, jointly and severally, to pay to the applicants the sum of EUR 1 million;










—


order the defendants to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of equal treatment and of the duty of transparency.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to be heard.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging breach of the obligation to state reasons and a manifest error of assessment.
Case C-644/16: Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Synthon BV v Astellas Pharma Inc.
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: intellectual property, proof








C_2018190EN.01001804.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/18





Order of the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Synthon BV v Astellas Pharma Inc.
(Case C-644/16) (1)

(2018/C 190/28)
Language of the case: Dutch
The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 86, 20.3.2017.
Case T-759/16: Order of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — Campailla v European Union (Action for damages — Law governing the institutions — Liability of the European Union — Decisions delivered by the General Court and by the Court of Justice — Action dismissed by the General Court as inadmissible — Appeal dismissed as inadmissible on the ground of lack of representation — Action manifestly inadmissible)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, judgment of the Court (EU)








C_2018112EN.01003101.xml










26.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/31





Order of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — Campailla v European Union
(Case T-759/16) (1)

((Action for damages - Law governing the institutions - Liability of the European Union - Decisions delivered by the General Court and by the Court of Justice - Action dismissed by the General Court as inadmissible - Appeal dismissed as inadmissible on the ground of lack of representation - Action manifestly inadmissible))
(2018/C 112/40)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Massimo Campailla (Holtz, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: initially J. Inghelram and L. Tonini Alabiso, and subsequently J. Inghelram and V. Hanley-Emilsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the order of 6 October 2011, Campailla v Commission (C-265/11 P, not published, EU:C:2011:644).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Mr Massimo Campailla shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union.






(1)  OJ C 78, 13.3.17.
Case C-344/16: Order of the President of the Court of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Die Länderbahn GmbH DLB v DB Station & Service AG
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: charges for use of infrastructure, payment, rail transport, transport infrastructure








C_2018190EN.01001701.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/17





Order of the President of the Court of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Die Länderbahn GmbH DLB v DB Station & Service AG
(Case C-344/16) (1)

(2018/C 190/23)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 428, 21.11.2016.
Case T-845/16: Order of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — QG v Commission (Action for annulment — State aid — Aid granted by the Spanish authorities to certain professional football clubs — Preferential tax rate applied in connection with corporate tax — Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market — No interest in bringing proceedings — Manifest inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Spain, State aid, control of State aid, corporation tax, professional sport, sports body, tax relief








C_2018104EN.01004101.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/41





Order of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — QG v Commission
(Case T-845/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - State aid - Aid granted by the Spanish authorities to certain professional football clubs - Preferential tax rate applied in connection with corporate tax - Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market - No interest in bringing proceedings - Manifest inadmissibility))
(2018/C 104/53)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: QG (represented by: L. Ruiz Ezquerra, R. Oncina Borrego, I. Sobrepera Millet and A. Hernández Pardo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 4046 final of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.29769 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by Spain for certain football clubs.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for a decision that there is no need to adjudicate is dismissed.










2.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










3.


There is no longer any need to rule on the applications to intervene submitted by the Kingdom of Spain and Fútbol Club Barcelona.










4.


QG shall pay the costs.










5.


QG, the European Commission, the Kingdom of Spain and Fútbol Club Barcelona shall each bear their own respective costs relating to the applications to intervene.






(1)  OJ C 53, 20.2.2017.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2018023EN.01000701.xml










23.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 23/7





Euro exchange rates (1)

22 January 2018
(2018/C 23/07)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2239 




JPY


Japanese yen


135,66 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4442 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88085 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,8340 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1764 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6223 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,399 




HUF


Hungarian forint


309,65 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1707 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6670 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,6552 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5287 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5270 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,5689 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6758 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6151 




KRW


South Korean won


1 309,98 




ZAR


South African rand


14,8092 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8374 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4355 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 341,51 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8160 




PHP


Philippine peso


62,288 




RUB


Russian rouble


69,2819 




THB


Thai baht


38,993 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,9083 




MXN


Mexican peso


22,8062 




INR


Indian rupee


78,2225 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-812/17 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament (Interim measures — Public procurement — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Withdrawal of the contested act — No need to adjudicate in part — Application for an injunction — No urgency)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, public building, services contract, tendering








C_2018104EN.01004202.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/42





Order of the President of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament
(Case T-812/17 R)
((Interim measures - Public procurement - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Withdrawal of the contested act - No need to adjudicate in part - Application for an injunction - No urgency))
(2018/C 104/55)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Seco Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) Vinçotte (Vilvoorde, Belgium) (represented by: A. Delvaux and R. Simar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: P. López-Carceller and Z. Nagy, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, first, for a suspension of the operation of the decision of the Parliament of 1 December 2017 to reject the applicants’ tender in the tender procedure 06D 20/2017/M005 entitled ‘Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels’ and to award the contract to another tenderer, and secondly, for an injunction against the Parliament.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no need to adjudicate on the application for a suspension of the operation of the decision of the Parliament of 1 December 2017 to reject the tender of Seco Belgium and Vinçotte in the tender procedure 06D 20/2017/M005 entitled ‘Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels’ and to award the contract to another tenderer.










2.


The application for interim measures is dismissed as to the remainder.










3.


The order of 21 December 2017, Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament (T-812/17 R), is set aside.










4.


The costs are reserved.
Case C-267/16: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of Gibraltar) — The Queen on the application of Albert Buhagiar and Others v Minister for Justice (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Territorial scope of EU law — Article 355(3) TFEU — Act concerning the Conditions of Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Adjustments to the Treaties — Article 29 — Point 4 of Section I of Annex I — Exclusion of Gibraltar from the customs territory of the European Union — Implications — Directive 91/477/EEC — Article 1(4) — Article 12(2) — Annex II — European firearms pass — Hunting and target shooting activities — Applicability to the territory of Gibraltar — Obligation to transpose — No such obligation — Validity)
Date: 2018-01-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Gibraltar, application of EU law, hunting, personal weapon








C_2018104EN.01000401.xml










19.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/4





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 23 January 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of Gibraltar) — The Queen on the application of Albert Buhagiar and Others v Minister for Justice
(Case C-267/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Territorial scope of EU law - Article 355(3) TFEU - Act concerning the Conditions of Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Adjustments to the Treaties - Article 29 - Point 4 of Section I of Annex I - Exclusion of Gibraltar from the customs territory of the European Union - Implications - Directive 91/477/EEC - Article 1(4) - Article 12(2) - Annex II - European firearms pass - Hunting and target shooting activities - Applicability to the territory of Gibraltar - Obligation to transpose - No such obligation - Validity))
(2018/C 104/04)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court of Gibraltar

Parties to the main proceedings


Claimants: The Queen on the application of Albert Buhagiar, Wayne Piri, Stephanie Piri, Arthur Taylor, Henry Bonifacio, Colin Tomlinson, Darren Sheriff

Defendant: Minister for Justice

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 29 of the Act concerning the Conditions of Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Adjustments to the Treaties, read in conjunction with point 4 of Section I of Annex I thereto, must be interpreted as meaning that Article 12(2) of Council Directive 91/477/EEC of 18 June 1991 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons, as amended by Directive 2008/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008, read in conjunction with Article 1(4) thereof and Annex II thereto, does not apply on the territory of Gibraltar.










2.


Examination of the questions referred for a preliminary ruling has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Directive 91/477, as amended by Directive 2008/51.






(1)  OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.