do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-153/18: Action brought on 5 March 2018 — Sona Nutrition v EUIPO — Solgar Holdings (SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA)
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, dietary product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2018152EN.01005401.xml










30.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/54





Action brought on 5 March 2018 — Sona Nutrition v EUIPO — Solgar Holdings (SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA)
(Case T-153/18)
(2018/C 152/63)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Sona Nutrition Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Solgar Holdings, Inc. (Ronkonkoma, New York, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark in colours red, light brown, beige, dark brown and golden brown, SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA — Application for registration No 13 781 299

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2017 in Case R 1321/2017-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and Solgar Holdings, Inc., if it should intervene in these proceedings, to bear the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation No 2017/1001;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 2017/1001.
Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2018/331 of 5 March 2018 implementing Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: North Korea, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








L_2018063EN.01004401.xml










6.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 63/44








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION (CFSP) 2018/331
of 5 March 2018
         
implementing Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 31(2) thereof,


Having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 of 27 May 2016 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and repealing Decision 2013/183/CFSP (1), and in particular Article 33(1) thereof,


Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:







(1)


On 27 May 2016 the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2016/849.












(2)


On 15 February 2018 the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) amended the listing of an individual subject to restrictive measures.












(3)


Annex I to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Annex I to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Decision.


Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 5 March 2018.


For the Council


The President

N. DIMOV
            





(1)  
            OJ L 141, 28.5.2016, p. 79.




ANNEX
In Annex I to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849, entry 52 under the heading ‘A. Persons’ is replaced by the following:











‘52.


Ri Su Yong


 


DOB: 25.6.1968
Nationality: DPRK
Passport No: 654310175
Address: n/a
Gender: male
Served as Korea Ryonbong General Corporation representative in Cuba


2.6.2017


Official for Korea Ryonbong General Corporation, specialises in acquisition for DPRK's defence industries and support to Pyongyang's military-related sales. Its procurements also probably support the DPRK's chemical weapons programme.’
Case C-174/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 5 March 2018 — Jean Jacob, Dominique Lennertz v État belge
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, Luxembourg, basis of tax assessment, double taxation, pension scheme, tax exemption, tax relief, tax system








C_2018166EN.01002501.xml










14.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 166/25





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 5 March 2018 — Jean Jacob, Dominique Lennertz v État belge
(Case C-174/18)
(2018/C 166/32)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Jean Jacob, Dominique Lennertz

Defendants: État belge

Question referred

Is it contrary to Article 39 [EC, now Article 45 TFEU] for the Belgian tax system, in Article 155 of the CIR/92 and regardless of whether or not Circular No Ci.RH.331/575.420 of 12 March 2008 is applied, to have the effect that the Luxembourg pensions of the applicant Mr Jacob, which are exempted from tax pursuant to Article 18 of the Convention concluded between Belgium and Luxembourg for the avoidance of double taxation, are taken into account for the purpose of calculating the tax payable in Belgium and used as the basis of assessment for the granting of tax advantages provided for under the CIR/92, even though they should not form part of that basis by reason of their total exemption as provided for in the Convention for the avoidance of double taxation, and that those advantages, such as the tax-free allowance, long-term savings, costs paid with service vouchers, costs incurred in saving energy in the home, costs incurred in protecting the home against theft or fire, and charitable donations made by the applicant Mr Jacob, are partly lost, reduced or granted to a lesser extent than if both applicants had income earned in Belgium, which, for its part, is taxable in Belgium and is not exempt and may thus absorb the tax advantages in their entirety?
Case C-171/18: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (United Kingdom) made on 5 March 2018 — Safeway Ltd v Andrew Richard Newton, Safeway Pension Trustees Ltd
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: gender equality, pension scheme, trust company








C_2018190EN.01000801.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/8





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (United Kingdom) made on 5 March 2018 — Safeway Ltd v Andrew Richard Newton, Safeway Pension Trustees Ltd
(Case C-171/18)
(2018/C 190/10)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Safeway Ltd

Defendants: Andrew Richard Newton, Safeway Pension Trustees Ltd

Question referred

Where the rules of a pension scheme confer a power, as a matter of domestic law, upon the amendment of its Trust deed, to reduce retrospectively the value of both men’s and women’s accrued pension rights for a period between the date of a written announcement of intended changes to the scheme and the date when the Trust deed is actually amended, does Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (previously and at the material time Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome) require both men’s and women’s accrued pension rights to be treated as indefeasible during that period, in the sense that their pension rights are protected from retrospective reduction by the use of the domestic law power?
Case T-152/18: Action brought on 5 March 2018 — Sona Nutrition v EUIPO — Solgar Holdings (SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA)
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, dietary product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2018152EN.01005301.xml










30.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/53





Action brought on 5 March 2018 — Sona Nutrition v EUIPO — Solgar Holdings (SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA)
(Case T-152/18)
(2018/C 152/62)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Sona Nutrition Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Solgar Holdings, Inc. (Ronkonkoma, New York, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark in colours purple, light brown, beige, dark brown and golden brown, SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA — Application for registration No 13 781 331

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2017 in Case R 1319/2017-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and Solgar Holdings, Inc., if it should intervene in these proceedings, to bear the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation No 2017/1001;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 2017/1001.
Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








C_2018084EN.01000101.xml










6.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 84/1





Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine
(2018/C 84/01)
The following information is brought to the attention of the persons who appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 (3) concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine.
The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the abovementioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2014/119/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine. The grounds for designations of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.
The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the websites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 208/2014, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).
The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the abovementioned list should be reconsidered, before 1 December 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 attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.


(1)  OJ L 66, 6.3.2014, p. 26.

(2)  OJ L 63, 6.3.2018, p. 48.

(3)  OJ L 66, 6.3.2014, p. 1.
Case T-154/18: Action brought on 5 March 2018 — Sona Nutrition v EUIPO — Solgar Holdings (SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA)
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, dietary product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2018152EN.01005402.xml










30.4.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 152/54





Action brought on 5 March 2018 — Sona Nutrition v EUIPO — Solgar Holdings (SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA)
(Case T-154/18)
(2018/C 152/64)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Sona Nutrition Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Solgar Holdings, Inc. (Ronkonkoma, New York, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark in colours green, light brown, beige, dark brown and golden brown, SOLGAR Since 1947 MultiPlus WHOLEFOOD CONCENTRATE MULTIVITAMIN FORMULA — Application for registration No 13 781 273

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2017 in Case R 1322/2017-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and Solgar Holdings, Inc., if it should intervene in these proceedings, to bear the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation No 2017/1001;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 2017/1001.
Notice for the attention of certain persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Iran, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, natural person








C_2018084EN.01000301.xml










6.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 84/3





Notice for the attention of certain persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran
(2018/C 84/03)
The following information is brought to the attention of Mr AHMADI- MOQADDAM Esmail (No 1), Mr ARAGHI (ERAGHI) Abdollah (No 3), Mr NAQDI Mohammad-Reza (No 9), Mr RADAN Ahmad-Reza (No 10), Mr RAJABZADEH Azizollah (No 11), Mr SAJEDI-NIA Hossein (No 12), Mr TAEB Hossein (No 13), Mr HADDAD Hassan (No 16), Mr MOHSENI-EJEI Gholam-Hossein (No 21), Mr SHARIFI Malek Adjar (No 26), Mr YASAGHI Ali-Akbar (No 28), Mr ZANJIREI Mohammad-Ali (No 32), Mr ABBASZADEH- MESHKINI, Mahmoud (No 33), Mr AKBARSHAHI Ali-Reza (No 34), Mr AVAEE Seyyed Ali-Reza (No 36), Mr HABIBI Mohammad Reza (No 40), Mr JOKAR Mohammad Saleh (No 45), Mr MAHSOULI Sadeq (No 48), Mr OMIDI Mehrdad (No 50), Mr SALARKIA Mahmoud (No 51), Mr TALA Hossein (No 53), Mr TAMADDON Morteza (No 54), Mr ZEBHI Hossein (No 55), Mr BAKHTIARI Seyyed Morteza (No 59), Mr HOSSEINI Dr Mohammad (No 60), Mr MORTAZAVI Seyyed Solat (No 69), Mr FAHRADI Ali (No 73), Mr RAMEZANI Gholamhossein (No 75), Mr SARAFRAZ, Mohammad (No 82) and Cyber Police (No 1), persons and entity appearing in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP (1) and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 (2) concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran.
The Council intends to maintain the restrictive measures against the abovementioned persons and entity with new statements of reasons. Those persons and entity are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statements of reasons for their designation, before 13 March 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




Any observations received before 24 March 2018 will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council’s periodic review, in accordance with Article 3 of Decision 2011/235/CFSP and Article 12(4) of Regulation (EU) No 359/2011.


(1)  OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 51.

(2)  OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2018082EN.01000201.xml










5.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 82/2





Euro exchange rates (1)

2 March 2018
(2018/C 82/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,2312 




JPY


Japanese yen


129,77 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4479 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89320 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,1643 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1512 




ISK


Iceland króna


123,90 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6178 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,409 




HUF


Hungarian forint


313,88 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1944 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6595 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,6998 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5885 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5858 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,6397 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7014 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,6261 




KRW


South Korean won


1 334,84 




ZAR


South African rand


14,7068 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8121 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4445 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 963,47 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8267 




PHP


Philippine peso


64,033 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,3851 




THB


Thai baht


38,770 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,0096 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,3041 




INR


Indian rupee


80,3205 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-172/18: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (United Kingdom) made on 5 March 2018 — AMS Neve Ltd, Barnett Waddingham Trustees, Mark Crabtree v Heritage Audio SL, Pedro Rodríguez Arribas
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, Internet site, advertising, establishment, jurisdiction, legal domicile, registered trade mark, sale, trade-mark law








C_2018190EN.01000802.xml










4.6.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/8





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (United Kingdom) made on 5 March 2018 — AMS Neve Ltd, Barnett Waddingham Trustees, Mark Crabtree v Heritage Audio SL, Pedro Rodríguez Arribas
(Case C-172/18)
(2018/C 190/11)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Court of Appeal

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: AMS Neve Ltd, Barnett Waddingham Trustees, Mark Crabtree

Defendants: Heritage Audio SL, Pedro Rodríguez Arribas

Questions referred

In circumstances where an undertaking is established and domiciled in Member State A and has taken steps in that territory to advertise and offer for sale goods under a sign identical to an EU trade mark on a website targeted at traders and consumers in Member State B:






i)


does an EU trade mark court in Member State B have jurisdiction to hear a claim for infringement of the EU trade mark in respect of the advertisement and offer for sale of the goods in that territory?










ii)


if not, which other criteria are to be taken into account by that EU trade mark court in determining whether it has jurisdiction to hear that claim?










iii)


in so far as the answer to (ii) requires that EU trade mark court to identify whether the undertaking has taken active steps in Member State B, which criteria are to be taken into account in determining whether the undertaking has taken such active steps?
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8772 — Borealis/NOVA Chemicals/Total/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance. )
Date: 2018-03-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, energy industry, fertiliser, gas industry, marketing, merger control, oil industry








C_2018082EN.01000401.xml










5.3.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 82/4





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8772 — Borealis/NOVA Chemicals/Total/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 82/04)






1.


On 23 February 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Borealis AG (‘Borealis’, Austria), jointly controlled by Mubadala Investment Company (‘Mubadala’, Abu Dhabi) and OMV AG (Austria),










—


NOVA Chemicals Corporation (‘NOVA’, Canada), wholly owned by Mubadala,










—


Total SA (‘Total’, France), and










—


Bayport Polymers LLC (the ‘JV’, USA).




Borealis, Nova and Total acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control over the JV.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for undertaking Borealis: production and commercialisation of polyolefin, base chemicals and fertilisers,
—   for undertaking NOVA: production and marketing of ethylene, polyethylene, styrene and co-products thereof,
—   for undertaking Total: engaged in the oil and gas industry and other energy sectors,
—   for the JV: production and marketing of polyethylene.










3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.8772 — Borealis/NOVA Chemicals/Total/JV
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu




Fax +32 22964301




Postal address:




European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.