do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-737/14: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Vnesheconombank v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine — Applicant’s name included in the list of entities to which the restrictive measures apply — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Right to effective judicial protection — Misuse of powers — Right to property — Freedom to conduct a business — Equal treatment)
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, bank, economic sanctions, equal treatment, international sanctions, ownership, right to justice








C_2018392EN.01001701.xml










29.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/17






Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Vnesheconombank v Council
(Case T-737/14) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine - Applicant’s name included in the list of entities to which the restrictive measures apply - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Right to effective judicial protection - Misuse of powers - Right to property - Freedom to conduct a business - Equal treatment))
(2018/C 392/20)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs (Vnesheconombank) (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: J. M. Viñals Camallonga, J.L. Iriarte Ángel and L. Barriola Urruticoechea, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: initially A. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado and G. Étienne, and subsequently F. Florindo Gijón, P. Mahnič Bruni and H. Marcos Fraile, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, D. Gauci and S. Pardo Quintillán, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment in part of Council Decision 2014/512/CFSP of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 229, p. 13), as amended by Council Decision 2014/659/CFSP of 8 September 2014, amending Decision 2014/512 (OJ 2014 L 271, p. 54), and of Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 229, p. 1), as amended by Council Regulation (EU) No 960/2014 of 8 September 2014, amending Regulation No 833/2014 (OJ 2014 L 271, p. 3), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs (Vnesheconombank) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union in these proceedings and in the interlocutory proceedings;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.
Case C-594/16: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Enzo Buccioni v Banca d’Italia (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Directive 2013/36/EU — Article 53(1) — Obligation of professional secrecy on national authorities charged with prudential supervision of credit institutions — Credit institution which is being compulsorily wound up — Disclosure of confidential information in civil or commercial proceedings)
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Central Bank, bank, credit institution, financial solvency, liquidation, powers of the institutions (EU), right to information, rights of the defence, savings, trade information








C_2018408EN.01000801.xml










12.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/8






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Enzo Buccioni v Banca d’Italia
(Case C-594/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Directive 2013/36/EU - Article 53(1) - Obligation of professional secrecy on national authorities charged with prudential supervision of credit institutions - Credit institution which is being compulsorily wound up - Disclosure of confidential information in civil or commercial proceedings))
(2018/C 408/07)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Enzo Buccioni

Defendant: Banca d’Italia

Intervener: Banca Network Investimenti SpA, in liquidation

Operative part of the judgment

Article 53(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC, must be interpreted as not precluding the competent authorities of the Member States from disclosing confidential information to a person who so requests in order to be able to institute civil or commercial proceedings with a view to protecting proprietary interests which were prejudiced as a result of the compulsory liquidation of a credit institution. However, the request for disclosure must relate to information in respect of which the applicant puts forward precise and consistent evidence plausibly suggesting that it is relevant for the purposes of civil or commercial proceedings, the subject matter of which must be specifically identified by the applicant and without which the information in question cannot be used. It is for the competent authorities and courts to weigh up the interest of the applicant in having the information in question and the interests connected with maintaining the confidentiality of the information covered by the obligation of professional secrecy, before disclosing each piece of confidential information requested.


(1)  OJ C 63, 27.2.2017.
Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2018/1238 of 13 September 2018 implementing Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, North Korea, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person








L_2018231EN.01003701.xml










14.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 231/37








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION (CFSP) 2018/1238
of 13 September 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 8 August 2018, the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) amended the listing of one entity 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 hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Decision.


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




Done at Brussels, 13 September 2018.


For the Council


The President

J. BOGNER-STRAUSS
            





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




ANNEX
In Annex I to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849, entry 71 under the heading ‘B. Entities’, is replaced by the following:











 


Name


Alias


Location


Date of UN designation


Other information




‘71.


PRO-GAIN GROUP CORPORATION


 


 


30.3.2018


Company owned or controlled by Tsang Yung Yuan and involved in illicit transfers of DPRK coal.’.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1231 of 13 September 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, North Korea, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person








L_2018231EN.01001101.xml










14.9.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 231/11








            COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2018/1231
of 13 September 2018
         
implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 of 30 August 2017 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and repealing Regulation (EC) No 329/2007 (1), and in particular Article 47(5) thereof,


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

Whereas:







(1)


On 30 August 2017, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2017/1509.












(2)


On 8 August 2018, the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Committee established pursuant to UNSC Resolution 1718 (2006) amended the listing of one entity subject to restrictive measures.












(3)


Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 is hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.


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




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 September 2018.


For the Council


The President

J. BOGNER-STRAUSS
            





(1)  
            OJ L 224, 31.8.2017, p. 1.




ANNEX
In Annex XIII to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509, entry 71 under the heading ‘(b) Legal persons, entities and bodies’ is replaced by the following:











 


Name


Alias


Location


Date of UN designation


Other information




‘71.


PRO-GAIN GROUP CORPORATION


 


 


30.3.2018


Company owned or controlled by Tsang Yung Yuan and involved in illicit transfers of DPRK coal.’.
Case T-544/18: Action brought on 13 September 2018 — ArcelorMittal Bremen v Commission
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU emission allowance, Germany, air quality, greenhouse gas, information system, infringement of EU law, powder metallurgy, reduction of gas emissions








C_2018399EN.01005202.xml










5.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/52






Action brought on 13 September 2018 — ArcelorMittal Bremen v Commission
(Case T-544/18)
(2018/C 399/67)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: ArcelorMittal Bremen GmbH (Bremen, Deutschland) (represented by: S. Altenschmidt und D. Jacob, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare, pursuant to Article 265 TFEU, that the Commission infringed Article 52(2) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 389/2013 (1) by failing to instruct the central administrator to take into consideration the change to the national allocation table in the EUTL in respect of the applicant’s installation with EU-ID DE000000000000060;










—


alternatively, annul the decision adopted by the Commission on 31 August 2018 on the applicant’s request of 14 May 2018;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following plea in law:
Infringement of EU law
The applicant submits that the Commission is obliged to adopt the decision, pursuant to Article 52(2) of Regulation No 389/2013, since the change to the national allocation table is consistent with the requirements of EU law.
Further, the applicant submits that, in accordance with the rules laid down in Commission Decision 2011/278/EU, (2) the product-related historical activity level for sintered ore is to be determined on the basis of the quantities of sintered ore which are weighed when leaving the sinter installation.
Finally, the applicant takes the view that sintered ore which, after its production in the context of burden preparation in a blast furnace, is rescreened and again placed in a sinter installation as recycling material, should not be deducted when determining the activity level of the sinter installation.


(1)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 359/2013 of 2 May 2013 establishing a Union Registry pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Decisions No 280/2004/EC and No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulations (EU) No 920/2010 and No 1193/2011 (OJ 2013, L 122, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document C(2011) 2772) (OJ 2011, L 130, p. 1).
Case T-94/17: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — ACTC v EUIPO — Taiga (tigha) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark tigha — Earlier EU word mark TAIGA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark)
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018392EN.01002601.xml










29.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/26






Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — ACTC v EUIPO — Taiga (tigha)
(Case T-94/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark tigha - Earlier EU word mark TAIGA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark))
(2018/C 392/31)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ACTC GmbH (Erkrath, Germany) (represented by V. Hoene, D. Eickemeier and S. Gantenbrink, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by A. Kusturovic, D. Walicka and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Taiga AB (Varberg, Sweden) (represented by C. Eckhartt and K. Thanbichler-Brandl, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 December 2016 (Case R 693/2015-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Taiga and ACTC.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders ACTC GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 10.4.2017.
Case T-418/17: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Eduard Meier v EUIPO — Calzaturificio Elisabet (Safari Club) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark Safari Club — Earlier national figurative mark WS Walk Safari — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018392EN.01002801.xml










29.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/28






Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Eduard Meier v EUIPO — Calzaturificio Elisabet (Safari Club)
(Case T-418/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Safari Club - Earlier national figurative mark WS Walk Safari - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))
(2018/C 392/34)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Eduard Meier GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by S. Schicker and M. Knitter, 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: Calzaturificio Elisabet Srl (Monte Urano, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 May 2017 (Case R 1158/2016-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Calzaturificio Elisabet and Eduard Meier.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 May 2017 (Case R 1158/2016-4), in so far as it upheld the opposition to registration of the EU word mark Safari Club for the goods ‘game bags’ and ‘clothing for hunting, clothing and hunting boots’;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Case T-559/18: Action brought on 13 September 2018 — Atos Medical v EUIPO — Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb (medical plasters)
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, medical device








C_2018399EN.01005502.xml










5.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/55






Action brought on 13 September 2018 — Atos Medical v EUIPO — Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb (medical plasters)
(Case T-559/18)
(2018/C 399/71)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Atos Medical GmbH (Troisdorf, Germany) (represented by: K. Middelhoff, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb GmbH (Cologne, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Design at issue: Community design No 1339246-0009

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2018 in Case R 2215/2016-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs,




Should the other party intervene in the proceedings, the applicant further claims that the Court should:






—


order the other party to bear its own costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 4(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;










—


Infringement of Articles 5 and 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;










—


Infringement of Article 25(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.
Case T-627/16: Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Czech Republic v Commission (EAGF — Expenditure excluded from financing — Expenditure incurred by the Czech Republic — Decoupled direct aid — Remote-sensing checks — Wine-growing sector — Cross-compliance — Reoccurrence of non-compliance)
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, single payment scheme, viticulture








C_2018392EN.01002102.xml










29.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/21






Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Czech Republic v Commission
(Case T-627/16) (1)

((EAGF - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by the Czech Republic - Decoupled direct aid - Remote-sensing checks - Wine-growing sector - Cross-compliance - Reoccurrence of non-compliance))
(2018/C 392/25)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Pavliš and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, Z. Malůšková and K. Walkerová, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: F. Bergius, A. Falk, C. Meyer-Seitz and H. Shev, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1059 of 20 June 2016 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2016 L 173, p. 59), in so far as it excludes the payments made by the Czech Republic under the EAGF in the amount of EUR 30 206 401,58.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1059 of 20 June 2016 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in so far as it excludes the payments made by the Czech Republic under the EAGF in the amount of EUR 6 356 909,30 in respect of cross-compliance checks for the financial year 2011;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the European Commission, the Czech Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.
Case C-172/17 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 13 September 2018 — ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias v European Commission (Appeal — Arbitration clauses — Pocemon Agreement concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration 2007-2013 — Eligible costs — European Commission decision — Obligation to reimburse sums paid — Counter-claim)
Date: 2018-09-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU programme, Framework Programme for Research and Development, arbitration clause, costing, financial aid, reimbursement of aid








C_2018408EN.01001801.xml










12.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 408/18






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 13 September 2018 — ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias v European Commission
(Case C-172/17 P) (1)

((Appeal - Arbitration clauses - Pocemon Agreement concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration 2007-2013 - Eligible costs - European Commission decision - Obligation to reimburse sums paid - Counter-claim))
(2018/C 408/21)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellant: ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias (represented by: S. Paliou, dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and A. Kyratsou, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders ANKO AE Antiprosopeion, Emporiou kai Viomichanias to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 168, 29.5.2017.