do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8955 — Takeda/Shire) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bio-industry, economic concentration, merger control, orphan disease, pharmaceutical industry, therapeutics








C_2018355EN.01000801.xml










4.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/8






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.8955 — Takeda/Shire)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2018/C 355/05)

1.   
On 28 September 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:






—


Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (‘Takeda’, Japan), and










—


Shire plc (‘Shire’, Jersey).




Takeda acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Shire.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are as follows:






—


Takeda is a global pharmaceutical company with a particular focus on oncology, gastroenterology, neuroscience and vaccines.










—


Shire is a global biopharmaceutical company and specialises in the treatment of rare diseases across therapeutic areas.






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.



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.8955 — Takeda/Shire
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’).
Case T-150/17: Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Asolo v EUIPO — Red Bull (FLÜGEL) (European Union trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — European Union word mark FLÜGEL — Earlier national word marks …VERLEIHT FLÜGEL and RED BULL VERLEIHT FLÜÜÜGEL — Relative grounds for refusal — Extinction of rights due to acquiescence — Article 54(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 61(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Absence of likelihood of confusion — Absence of similarity between the goods — Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Article 8(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018427EN.01005202.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/52






Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Asolo v EUIPO — Red Bull (FLÜGEL)
(Case T-150/17) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union word mark FLÜGEL - Earlier national word marks …VERLEIHT FLÜGEL and RED BULL VERLEIHT FLÜÜÜGEL - Relative grounds for refusal - Extinction of rights due to acquiescence - Article 54(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 61(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Absence of likelihood of confusion - Absence of similarity between the goods - Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Article 8(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(2018/C 427/67)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Asolo LTD (Limassol, Cyprus) (represented by: W. Pors and N. Dorenbosch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: M. Capostagno, A. Folliard-Monguiral and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Red Bull GmbH (Fuschl am See, Austria) (represented by: A. Renck and S. Petivlasova, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 November 2016 (Case R 282/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Red Bull and Asolo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 17 November 2016 (Case R 282/2015-5), in so far as it dismisses the appeal against the decision of the Cancellation Division declaring the EU trade mark FLÜGEL invalid for the goods ‘alcoholic beverages (except beers)’ and ‘alcoholic essences; alcoholic extracts; fruits extracts (alcoholic)’ in Class 33 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders EUIPO and Red Bull GmbH to bear, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by Asolo Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 129, 24.4.2017.
Case T-272/16: Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Greece v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic — Flat-rate financial corrections — Specific financial corrections — Area-related aid scheme — Concept of permanent pasture — Conditions for imposing a flat-rate correction of 25 % — Flat-rate correction of 10 % — Flat-rate correction of 5 % — Article 31(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 — Key controls — Ancillary controls — Multiannual measures — Long-term projects)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, grassland, single payment scheme








C_2018427EN.01004101.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/41






Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Greece v Commission
(Case T-272/16) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic - Flat-rate financial corrections - Specific financial corrections - Area-related aid scheme - Concept of permanent pasture - Conditions for imposing a flat-rate correction of 25 % - Flat-rate correction of 10 % - Flat-rate correction of 5 % - Article 31(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 - Key controls - Ancillary controls - Multiannual measures - Long-term projects)
(2018/C 427/50)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: G. Kanellopoulos, O. Tsirkinidou, A. Vasilopoulou, D. Ntourntoureka and E. Leftheriotou, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially D. Triantafyllou and J. Aquilina, then D. Triantafyllou, J. Aquilina and K. Skelly, and lastly D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment in part of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/417 of 17 March 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 75, p. 16).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.
Case C-622/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 4 October 2018 — AR v Cooper International Spirits LLC, Établissements Gabriel Boudier SA, St Dalfour SAS
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, indemnification, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018436EN.01003003.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/30






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 4 October 2018 — AR v Cooper International Spirits LLC, Établissements Gabriel Boudier SA, St Dalfour SAS
(Case C-622/18)
(2018/C 436/43)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: AR

Defendants: Cooper International Spirits LLC, Établissements Gabriel Boudier SA, St Dalfour SAS

Question referred

Must Article 5(1)(b) and Articles 10 and 12 of Directive 2008/95 EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (1) be interpreted as meaning that a proprietor which has never exploited its trade mark and whose rights over it were revoked on expiry of the period of five years following publication of its registration can obtain compensation for injury caused by infringement, claiming an adverse effect on the essential function of its trade mark, caused by use by a third party, before the effective date of the revocation, of a sign similar to that trade mark to designate goods or services identical or similar to those for which that trade mark was registered?


(1)  OJ 2008 L 299, p. 25.
Case C-337/17: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Szczecinie — Poland) — Feniks Sp. z o.o. v Azteca Products & Services SL (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(1)(a) — Concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’ — Actio pauliana)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: area of freedom, security and justice, civil proceedings, claim, debt, jurisdiction, real property, sale








C_2018436EN.01001101.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/11






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Szczecinie — Poland) — Feniks Sp. z o.o. v Azteca Products & Services SL
(Case C-337/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Special jurisdiction - Article 7(1)(a) - Concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’ - Actio pauliana))
(2018/C 436/12)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Szczecinie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Feniks Sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Azteca Products & Services SL

Operative part of the judgment

In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, an actio pauliana, whereby the person entitled to a debt arising under a contract requests that an act by which his debtor has transferred an asset to a third party and which is allegedly detrimental to his rights be declared ineffective in relation to the creditor, is covered by the rule of international jurisdiction provided for in Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.


(1)  OJ C 300, 11.9.2017.
Case C-599/17: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 October 2018 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Implementing Directive (EU) 2015/2392 — Reporting to competent authorities of actual or potential infringements of the market abuse regulation — Failure to communicate or failure to transpose within the prescribed period)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: data transmission, dissemination of information, exchange of information, financial instrument, infringement of EU law, insider trading, national implementing measure, prevention of delinquency, restriction on competition, stock-exchange transaction








C_2018436EN.01001402.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/14






Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 October 2018 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain
(Case C-599/17) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Implementing Directive (EU) 2015/2392 - Reporting to competent authorities of actual or potential infringements of the market abuse regulation - Failure to communicate or failure to transpose within the prescribed period))
(2018/C 436/17)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: J. Rius and T. Scharf, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Jiménez García, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Implementing Directive (EU) 2015/2392 of 17 December 2015 on Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards reporting to competent authorities of actual or potential infringements of that regulation, and by failing to communicate to the European Commission the text of the provisions adopted to transpose that implementing directive, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that implementing directive, in particular under the first paragraph of Article 13 thereof;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 5, 8.1.2018.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1484 of 4 October 2018 on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 25th partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common organisation of markets, intervention buying, invitation to tender, minimum price, purchase price, skimmed milk powder, tendering








L_2018251EN.01002401.xml










5.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 251/24








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2018/1484
of 4 October 2018
         
on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 25th partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),


Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1240 of 18 May 2016 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to public intervention and aid for private storage (2), and in particular Article 32 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure.












(2)


In the light of the tenders received for the 25th partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should be fixed.












(3)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
For the 25th partial invitation to tender for the selling of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080, in respect of which the period during which tenders were to be submitted ended on 2 October 2018, the minimum selling price shall be 123 EUR/100 kg.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 4 October 2018.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Jerzy PLEWA
            

Director-General


Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development






(1)  
            OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(2)  
            OJ L 206, 30.7.2016, p. 71.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 of 25 November 2016 opening the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure (OJ L 321, 29.11.2016, p. 45).
Case C-12/17: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj — Romania) — Tribunalul Botoşani, Ministerul Justiţiei v Maria Dicu (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Organisation of working time — Directive 2003/88/EC — Right to paid annual leave — Directive 2010/18/EU — Revised Framework Agreement on parental leave — Parental leave not regarded as a period of actual work)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arrangement of working time, paid leave, parental leave








C_2018436EN.01000701.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/7






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Cluj — Romania) — Tribunalul Botoşani, Ministerul Justiţiei v Maria Dicu
(Case C-12/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Organisation of working time - Directive 2003/88/EC - Right to paid annual leave - Directive 2010/18/EU - Revised Framework Agreement on parental leave - Parental leave not regarded as a period of actual work))
(2018/C 436/06)
Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Tribunalul Botoşani, Ministerul Justiţiei

Defendant: Maria Dicu

Intervening parties: Curtea de Apel Suceava, Consiliul Superior al Magistraturii

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7 of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time is to be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national law, such as the provision at issue in the main proceedings, which, for the purpose of determining a worker’s entitlement to paid annual leave, as guaranteed by that article for a worker in respect of a given reference period, does not treat the amount of time spent by that worker on parental leave during that reference period as a period of actual work.


(1)  OJ C 104, 3.4.2017.
Case T-345/16: Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Blackmore v EUIPO — Paice (DEEP PURPLE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark DEEP PURPLE — Earlier non-registered mark DEEP PURPLE — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Rules governing common-law action for passing-off — Goodwill — Breach of formal requirements — Article 177(1)(d) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, music, performing arts, recording, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2018427EN.01004301.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/43






Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Blackmore v EUIPO — Paice (DEEP PURPLE)
(Case T-345/16) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark DEEP PURPLE - Earlier non-registered mark DEEP PURPLE - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Rules governing common-law action for passing-off - Goodwill - Breach of formal requirements - Article 177(1)(d) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court - Inadmissibility)
(2018/C 427/53)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Richard Hugh Blackmore (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: initially A. Edwards-Stuart, and subsequently T. Alkin, Barristers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: D. Gája and D. Walicka, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ian Paice (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Engelman, Barrister, and J. Stephenson, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 (Case R 880/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Paice and Mr Blackmore.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Richard Hugh Blackmore to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 314, 29.8.2016.
Case C-105/17: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna — Bulgaria) — Komisia za zashtita na potrebitelite v Evelina Kamenova (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Consumer protection — Directive 2005/29/EC — Article 2(b) and (d) — Directive 2011/83/EU — Article 2(2) — Concepts of ‘trader’ and ‘commercial practices’)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: advertising, business activity, consumer protection, entrepreneur, merchant, natural person, restriction on competition, sale








C_2018436EN.01000901.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/9






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna — Bulgaria) — Komisia za zashtita na potrebitelite v Evelina Kamenova
(Case C-105/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 2005/29/EC - Article 2(b) and (d) - Directive 2011/83/EU - Article 2(2) - Concepts of ‘trader’ and ‘commercial practices’))
(2018/C 436/09)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad — Varna

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Komisia za zashtita na potrebitelite

Defendant: Evelina Kamenova

Other party: Okrazhna prokuratura — Varna

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(b) and (d) of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) and Article 2(2) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council must be interpreted as meaning that a natural person, such as the defendant in the main proceedings, who publishes simultaneously on a website a number of advertisements offering new and second-hand goods for sale can be classified as a ‘trader’, and such an activity can constitute a ‘commercial practice’, only if that person is acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession, this being a matter for the national court to determine, in the light of all relevant circumstances of the individual case.


(1)  OJ C 144, 8.5.2017.