do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-191/17: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Bundeskammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte v ING-DiBa Direktbank Austria Niederlassung der ING-DiBa AG (Directive 2007/64/EC — Payment services in the internal market — Concept of ‘payment account’ — Potential inclusion of a savings account enabling its user to make payments and withdrawals by way of a current account opened in his name)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: bank deposit, electronic banking, electronic money, financial legislation, intra-EU payment, right of establishment, single market








C_2018436EN.01001001.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/10






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 4 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Bundeskammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte v ING-DiBa Direktbank Austria Niederlassung der ING-DiBa AG
(Case C-191/17) (1)

((Directive 2007/64/EC - Payment services in the internal market - Concept of ‘payment account’ - Potential inclusion of a savings account enabling its user to make payments and withdrawals by way of a current account opened in his name))
(2018/C 436/10)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bundeskammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte

Defendant: ING-DiBa Direktbank Austria Niederlassung der ING-DiBa AG

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(14) of Directive 2007/64/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on payment services in the internal market amending Directives 97/7/EC, 2002/65/EC, 2005/60/EC and 2006/48/EC and repealing Directive 97/5/EC must be interpreted as meaning that a savings account which allows for sums deposited without notice and from which payment and withdrawal transactions may be made solely by means of a current account does not come within the concept of ‘payment account’.


(1)  OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1483 of 4 October 2018 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 concerning certain specific restrictions on economic and financial relations with Iraq
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: European Commission, Service for Foreign Policy Instruments
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Iraq, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, trade restriction








L_2018251EN.01002201.xml










5.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 251/22








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2018/1483
of 4 October 2018
         
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 concerning certain specific restrictions on economic and financial relations with Iraq


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 of 7 July 2003 concerning certain specific restrictions on economic and financial relations with Iraq and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2465/96 (1), and in particular Article 11(b) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 lists public bodies, corporations and agencies and natural and legal persons, bodies and entities of the previous government of Iraq covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources that were located outside Iraq on the date of 22 May 2003 under that Regulation.












(2)


On 1 October 2018, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council decided to remove one entry from the list of persons or entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply.












(3)


Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that 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,


Head of the Service for Foreign Policy Instruments






(1)  
            OJ L 169, 8.7.2003, p. 6.




ANNEX
In Annex III to Council Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003, the following entry is deleted:







‘177.


STATE ORGANISATION FOR CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES. Address: P.O. Box 2101, Masbeh Square, Baghdad, Iraq.’
Case T-344/16: 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 — No likelihood of misrepresentation — 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.01004201.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/42






Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Blackmore v EUIPO — Paice (DEEP PURPLE)
(Case T-344/16) (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 - No likelihood of misrepresentation - Article 177(1)(d) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court - Inadmissibility)
(2018/C 427/52)
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 736/2015-5), 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 T-820/17: Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Frinsa del Noroeste v EUIPO — Alimentos Friorizados (Alfrisa) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Alfrisa — Earlier EU figurative mark Frinsa F — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, export, fish product, frozen product, import, prepared foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable








C_2018427EN.01006401.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/64






Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Frinsa del Noroeste v EUIPO — Alimentos Friorizados (Alfrisa)
(Case T-820/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Alfrisa - Earlier EU figurative mark Frinsa F - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2018/C 427/84)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Frinsa del Noroeste, S.A. (Santa Eugenia de Ribeira, Spain) (represented by: J. Botella Reyna, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Alimentos Friorizados, SA (Barberá del Vallés, Spain) (represented by: S. de Nadal Arce, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 September 2017 (Case R 956/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Frinsa del Noroeste and Alimentos Friorizados.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Frinsa del Noroeste, S.A. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 94, 12.3.2018.
Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 4 October 2018 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas (ECB/2018/23)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European System of Central Banks, Lithuania, accountant, auditing, central bank, euro area








C_2018370EN.01000101.xml










12.10.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 370/1






RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
of 4 October 2018
to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas
(ECB/2018/23)
(2018/C 370/01)
THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,
Whereas:






(1)


The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.










(2)


The mandate of Lietuvos bankas’ current external auditors, UAB PricewaterhouseCoopers, ended following the audit for the financial year 2017.










(3)


By Recommendation ECB/2018/15 of the European Central Bank (1), the ECB recommended that UAB Deloitte Lietuva be appointed as external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2018 to 2021. UAB Deloitte Lietuva did not take up the appointment and it is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2018.










(4)


Lietuvos bankas has selected UAB Ernst & Young Baltic as its external auditors for the financial years 2018 to 2021,




HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that UAB Ernst & Young Baltic should be appointed as the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas for the financial years 2018 to 2021.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 4 October 2018.


The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI




(1)  Recommendation ECB/2018/15 of the European Central Bank of 18 May 2018 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of Lietuvos bankas (OJ C 181, 28.5.2018, p. 1).
Case T-328/16: Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Paice v EUIPO — Blackmore (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 — No likelihood of misrepresentation)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, audiovisual equipment, clothing, publishing, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law, traineeship








C_2018427EN.01004102.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/41






Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Paice v EUIPO — Blackmore (DEEP PURPLE)
(Case T-328/16) (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 - No likelihood of misrepresentation)
(2018/C 427/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ian Paice (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Engelman, Barrister, and J. Stephenson, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 (Case R 736/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Paice and Mr Blackmore.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Ian Paice to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 305, 22.8.2016.
Case T-598/18: Action brought on 4 October 2018 — Grupo textil brownie v EUIPO — The Guide Association (BROWNIE)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business management, clothing, decorative item, electronic commerce, leather, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2018427EN.01010001.xml










26.11.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/100






Action brought on 4 October 2018 — Grupo textil brownie v EUIPO — The Guide Association (BROWNIE)
(Case T-598/18)
(2018/C 427/132)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Grupo textil brownie, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza and J. C. Quero Navarro, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: The Guide Association (London, United Kingdom)

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 word mark — Application for registration No 14 016 844

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 July 2018 in Case R 2680/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to bear the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-506/17: Order of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Makhlouf v Council (Action for annulment — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures against Syria — Freezing of funds — Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2018-10-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Syria, common foreign and security policy, economic sanctions, freedom of movement, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, right to justice, rights of the defence, trade restriction








C_2018436EN.01005101.xml










3.12.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 436/51






Order of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Makhlouf v Council
(Case T-506/17) (1)

((Action for annulment - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Syria - Freezing of funds - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2018/C 436/72)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Rami Makhlouf (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Kyriakopoulou and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017, amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 62), and its subsequent implementing acts, insofar as they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Rami Makhlouf is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.






(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.