do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2018293EN.01000101.xml










20.8.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

17 August 2018
(2018/C 293/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1391 




JPY


Japanese yen


125,75 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4578 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89575 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4935 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1338 




ISK


Iceland króna


122,80 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6795 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,729 




HUF


Hungarian forint


323,88 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3115 




RON


Romanian leu


4,6558 




TRY


Turkish lira


7,0282 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5670 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4976 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,9412 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7254 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5651 




KRW


South Korean won


1 282,38 




ZAR


South African rand


16,9966 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8420 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4225 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 674,15 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6811 




PHP


Philippine peso


60,876 




RUB


Russian rouble


76,8166 




THB


Thai baht


37,869 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,5001 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,7831 




INR


Indian rupee


79,9195 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8969 — FSN Capital V/Saferoad Holding) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, road building, road network, road safety, transport infrastructure








C_2018300EN.01000301.xml










27.8.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 300/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8969 — FSN Capital V/Saferoad Holding)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 300/05)
On 20 August 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8969. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-498/18: Action brought on 20 August 2018 — ZPC Flis v EUIPO — Aldi Einkauf (Happy Moreno choco)
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, confectionery product, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2018352EN.01004701.xml










1.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/47






Action brought on 20 August 2018 — ZPC Flis v EUIPO — Aldi Einkauf (Happy Moreno choco)
(Case T-498/18)
(2018/C 352/57)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZPC Flis sp.j. (Radziejowice, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark Happy Moreno choco — Application for registration No 15 028 087

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2018 in Case R 1464/2017-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and refer the case back to the EUIPO for reconsideration;
or










—


alter the contested decision by stating that there are no relative grounds for refusal of registration of the EUTMA 015028087 ‘Happy Moreno choco’ for all goods in classes 30 and 35 and the trademark shall be registered;










—


award the costs in the Applicant’s favour.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and the principle of legal certainty.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9013 — Amey Group/CAL/CAHPL) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, maintenance, merger control, provision of services, public building








C_2018302EN.01000202.xml










28.8.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 302/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9013 — Amey Group/CAL/CAHPL)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 302/04)
On 20 August 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M9013. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9047 — Schwarz Gruppe/Karl Tönsmeier Entsorgungswirtschaft/Tönsmeier Dienstleistung) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, food industry, merger control, provision of services, subsidiary, waste management








C_2018300EN.01000202.xml










27.8.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 300/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9047 — Schwarz Gruppe/Karl Tönsmeier Entsorgungswirtschaft/Tönsmeier Dienstleistung)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 300/04)
On 20 August 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M9047. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-544/18: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal (United Kingdom) made on 20 August 2018 — HM Revenue & Customs v HD
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: economic activity, motherhood, right of establishment, self-employed person, self-employment








C_2018436EN.01002002.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/20






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Upper Tribunal (United Kingdom) made on 20 August 2018 — HM Revenue & Customs v HD
(Case C-544/18)
(2018/C 436/26)
Language of the case: English

Referring court

Upper Tribunal

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: HM Revenue & Customs

Defendant: HD

Question referred

Must Article 49 TFEU be interpreted as meaning that such a person, who ceases self-employed activity in circumstances where there are physical constraints in the late stages of pregnancy and the aftermath of childbirth, retains the status of being self-employed, within the meaning of that Article, provided she returns to economic activity or seeking work within a reasonable period after the birth of her child?
Case T-251/18 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 20 August 2018 — IFSUA v Council (Interim measures — Fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks — Measures on European seabass fisheries — Ban on catches in recreational fisheries — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — No urgency)
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU waters, catch by species, conservation of fish stocks, fishing area, fishing rights, international waters, recreational fishing, sea fishing








C_2018381EN.01002601.xml










22.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/26






Order of the President of the General Court of 20 August 2018 — IFSUA v Council
(Case T-251/18 R)
((Interim measures - Fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks - Measures on European seabass fisheries - Ban on catches in recreational fisheries - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency))
(2018/C 381/30)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: International Forum for Sustainable Underwater Activities (IFSUA) (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: T. Gui Mori, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: F. Naert and P. Plaza García, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Morales Puerta, F. Moro and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Articles 278 and 279 for the suspension of operation of Article 2(2) and Article 9(4) and (5) of Council Regulation (EU) 2018/120 of 23 January 2018 fixing for 2018 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/127 (OJ 2018, L.27, p. 1).

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-500/18: Action brought on 20 August 2018 — Puma v EUIPO — Destilerias MG (MG PUMA)
Date: 2018-08-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018373EN.01001501.xml










15.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 373/15






Action brought on 20 August 2018 — Puma v EUIPO — Destilerias MG (MG PUMA)
(Case T-500/18)
(2018/C 373/16)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. Trieb and M. Schunke, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Destilerias MG SL (Vilanova i la Geltru, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union trade mark MG PUMA — Application for registration No 15 108 848

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 June 2018 in Case R 2019/2017-2.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Art. 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.