do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-715/17: Order of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — Hermann Biederlack v EUIPO (Feeling home) (European Union trade mark — Application for EU word mark Feeling home — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 [now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001] — Action manifestly lacking any basis in law)
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, furniture industry, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2018427EN.01007401.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/74






Order of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — Hermann Biederlack v EUIPO (Feeling home)
(Case T-715/17) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Application for EU word mark Feeling home - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 [now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001] - Action manifestly lacking any basis in law)
(2018/C 427/99)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Hermann Biederlack (Greven, Germany) (represented by: T. Seifried, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 June 2017 (Case R 252/2017-5), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Feeling home as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Hermann Biederlack GmbH & Co. KG is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 412, 4.12.2017.
Case T-504/18 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — XG v Commission (Interim measures — Refusal to grant access to the Commission’s premises — Application for interim measures — No interest in obtaining the interim measures sought)
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: fundamental rights, public building








C_2018399EN.01003702.xml










5.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/37






Order of the President of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — XG v Commission
(Case T-504/18 R)
((Interim measures - Refusal to grant access to the Commission’s premises - Application for interim measures - No interest in obtaining the interim measures sought))
(2018/C 399/51)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: XG (represented by: S. Kaisergruber and A. Burghelle-Vernet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Van Nuffel and T. Bohr, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking, first, suspension of the operation of the Commission’s decision of 2 July 2018 confirming its refusal to allow access to its premises and, secondly, an order that the Commission provisionally grant access to its premises.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


The costs are reserved.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8995 — MAGNA/OLSA) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry, supplier, vehicle parts








C_2018321EN.01000701.xml










11.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 321/7






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8995 — MAGNA/OLSA)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 321/05)

1.   
On 4 September 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 4(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Magna Closures S.p.A. (‘MAGNA’, Italy);










—


Olsa S.p.A. (‘OLSA’, Italy).




MAGNA acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, sole control over the whole of OLSA.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


MAGNA is an automotive supplier which manufactures and supplies automotive systems, assemblies, modules and components primarily for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles;










—


OLSA is an automotive supplier which manufactures and supplies lighting products for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles.






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.8995 — MAGNA/OLSA
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





E-mail: 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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9036 — Advent International Corporation/GE (Distributed Power Business)) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, engine, investment company, mechanical engineering, merger control, provision of services, spare part








C_2018332EN.01000101.xml










19.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 332/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9036 — Advent International Corporation/GE (Distributed Power Business))
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 332/01)
On 11 September 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 32018M9036. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-545/18: Action brought on 11 September 2018 — YL v Commission
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, abuse of power, damages, demotion, disciplinary proceedings, pay scale, promotion, staff regulations (EU)








C_2018427EN.01008301.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/83






Action brought on 11 September 2018 — YL v Commission
(Case T-545/18)
(2018/C 427/110)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: YL (represented by: P. Yon, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul his removal from the 2017 promotions list;










—


order his retroactive promotion as from 1 January 2017;










—


award him compensation for the damage — estimated in the amount of EUR 100 000 — suffered as a result of the contested measures: the number of days and amount of energy expended in respect of the present action and preparation thereof, overcoming the feeling of being rejected, ostracised and persecuted by an authority supposedly required to have regard to the welfare of its members of staff and have, if not a benevolent attitude towards them, then at least a neutral one;










—


order the reimbursement of his lawyer’s and legal fees in the amount of EUR 10 000, and










—


order the Commission to bear all costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’) by the appointing authority when it based its refusal to promote the applicant on a previously imposed penalty, when that penalty had already affected the applicant’s career by a relegation in step. Moreover, the contested decision was allegedly adopted on the ground that the penalty was related to the applicant’s conduct while on active duty, whereas the decision to impose a penalty of 2016 indicated that the acts in question were totally unconnected to the applicant’s duties and responsibilities.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging abuse of powers and process by the appointing authority when it used its power of promotion to increase the penalty imposed in 2016 and used the promotion procedure to circumvent the limits provided for in the Staff Regulations in the event of deferment of advancement.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 September 2018 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting the new psychoactive substances N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)piperidin-4-yl]cyclopropanecarboxamide (cyclopropylfentanyl) and 2-methoxy-N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)piperidin-4-yl]acetamide (methoxyacetylfentanyl) to control measures (09420/2018 – C8-0278/2018 – 2018/0118(NLE))
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: EU control, drug addiction, drug traffic, health control, health risk, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, narcotic








C_2019433EN.01021601.xml










23.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 433/216






P8_TA(2018)0320
Implementing decision on subjecting the new psychoactive substances cyclopropylfentanyl and methoxyacetylfentanyl to control measures *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 September 2018 on the draft Council implementing decision on subjecting the new psychoactive substances N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)piperidin-4-yl]cyclopropanecarboxamide (cyclopropylfentanyl) and 2-methoxy-N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)piperidin-4-yl]acetamide (methoxyacetylfentanyl) to control measures (09420/2018 – C8-0278/2018 – 2018/0118(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2019/C 433/27)

The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the Council draft (09420/2018),










—


having regard to Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union, as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, and Article 9 of Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0278/2018),










—


having regard to Council Decision 2005/387/JHA of 10 May 2005 on the information exchange, risk-assessment and control of new psychoactive substances (1), and in particular Article 8(3) thereof,










—


having regard to Rule 78c of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A8-0271/2018),












1.


Approves the Council draft;












2.


Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;












3.


Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to substantially amend the text approved by Parliament;












4.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.






(1)  OJ L 127, 20.5.2005, p. 32.
Case T-14/16: Judgment of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — Apimab Laboratoires and Others v Commission (Consumer protection — Setting of maximum levels for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in food supplements — Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 — Risk analysis — Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality — Principle of non-discrimination)
Date: 2018-09-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: consumer protection, dried product, equal treatment, food safety, food supplement, foodstuff, foodstuffs legislation, principle of proportionality








C_2018381EN.01001901.xml










22.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/19






Judgment of the General Court of 11 September 2018 — Apimab Laboratoires and Others v Commission
(Case T-14/16) (1)

((Consumer protection - Setting of maximum levels for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in food supplements - Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 - Risk analysis - Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality - Principle of non-discrimination))
(2018/C 381/20)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Apimab Laboratoires (Clermont-l’Hérault, France) and the seven other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: A. de Brosses, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herbout-Borczak and C. Valero, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment in part of Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/1933 of 27 October 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 as regards maximum levels for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in cocoa fibre, banana chips, food supplements, dried herbs and dried spices (OJ 2015 L 282, p. 11).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Apimab Laboratoires and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 90, 7.3.2016.