do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-727/17: Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — PP and Others v EEAS
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, education grant, equal treatment, legality, pay, principle of legal certainty, right to education, right to justice, staff regulations (EU)








C_2019103EN.01005903.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/59






Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — PP and Others v EEAS
(Case T-727/17) (1)

(2019/C 103/77)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 22, 22.1.2018.
Case C-194/17 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 31 January 2019 — Georgios Pandalis v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 51(1)(a) and (2) and Article 75 — EU trade mark Cystus — Food supplements not for medical purposes — Partial revocation — Lack of genuine use of the trade mark — Perception of the word ‘cystus’ as a descriptive indication of the main ingredient of the goods concerned — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, food supplement, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_2019112EN.01000301.xml










25.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/3






Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 31 January 2019 — Georgios Pandalis v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH
(Case C-194/17 P) (1)

((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 51(1)(a) and (2) and Article 75 - EU trade mark Cystus - Food supplements not for medical purposes - Partial revocation - Lack of genuine use of the trade mark - Perception of the word ‘cystus’ as a descriptive indication of the main ingredient of the goods concerned - Obligation to state reasons))
(2019/C 112/03)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Georgios Pandalis (represented by: A. Franke, Rechtsanwältin)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: S. Hanne and D. Walicka, acting as Agents), LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH (represented by: N. Weber and L. Thiel, Rechtsanwälte)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Mr Georgios Pandalis to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 300, 11.9.2017.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9240 — Siemens Project Ventures/Veja Mate Offshore Project) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, energy industry, energy production, investment company, medical institution, merger control, power plant, wind energy








C_2019050EN.01000102.xml










8.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 50/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9240 — Siemens Project Ventures/Veja Mate Offshore Project)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 50/02)
On 31 January 2019, 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 language 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 32019M9240. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-74/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Lisboa — Juízo Local Cível de Lisboa — Juiz 18 (Portugal) lodged on 31 January 2019 — LE v Transport Aéreos Portugueses S.A.
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air safety, air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, consumer protection, indemnification, traveller








C_2019148EN.01001801.xml










29.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 148/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Lisboa — Juízo Local Cível de Lisboa — Juiz 18 (Portugal) lodged on 31 January 2019 — LE v Transport Aéreos Portugueses S.A.
(Case C-74/19)
(2019/C 148/17)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Lisboa — Juízo Local Cível de Lisboa — Juiz 18

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: LE

Defendant: Transport Aéreos Portugueses S.A.

Questions referred







1.


Does the fact that a passenger, in the course of a flight, bites other passengers and assaults crew members who attempt to calm him to such an extent as to justify, according to the flight commander, a diversion to the nearest airport to disembark that passenger and unload his luggage, which results in the delayed arrival of the flight at its destination, fall within the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’, referred to in recital 14 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004? (1)











2.


Is an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ which occurs on an outward flight immediately preceding the return flight made by the same aircraft, relevant to exempt the air carrier from liability for the delay in the take-off of that latter flight onto which the complainant passenger (the applicant in this case) has boarded?










3.


For the purposes of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004, does the analysis carried out by the airline (the defendant in this case), which concluded that sending another aircraft would not avoid the situation of delay and therefore the transfer of the transit passenger (the applicant in this case) to a flight scheduled for the following day, since the airline operates only one daily flight to the passenger’s final destination, correspond to conduct by the airline in which it took all reasonable measures, even if it was not possible to remedy the delay?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).
European Parliament legislative resolution of 31 January 2019 on the proposal for a Council decision authorising Austria, Luxembourg and Romania to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2018)0530 — C8-0378/2018 — 2018/0279(NLE))
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Committee on Legal Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Austria, Belarus, Luxembourg, Romania, Uzbekistan, accession to an agreement, child protection, illegal restraint, international convention, parental responsibility








C_2020411EN.01069701.xml










27.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 411/697






P8_TA(2019)0052
Accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 31 January 2019 on the proposal for a Council decision authorising Austria, Luxembourg and Romania to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2018)0530 — C8-0378/2018 — 2018/0279(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2020/C 411/58)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2018)0530),










—


having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,










—


having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0378/2018),










—


having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice (1) on the exclusive external competence of the European Union for a declaration of acceptance of an accession to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,










—


having regard to Rules 78c and 108(8) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0458/2018),












1.


Approves the authorisation for Austria, Luxembourg and Romania to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Belarus and Uzbekistan to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States, as well as to the Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law.






(1)  Opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014, 1/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2303.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9262 — ADM/Gleadell Agriculture) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agro-industry, cereals, economic concentration, fats, merger control, starch, wholesale selling








C_2019038EN.01002401.xml










31.1.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/24






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9262 — ADM/Gleadell Agriculture)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 38/10)

1.   
On 23 January 2019, 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:






—


ADM Arkady Limited (‘ADM’, United Kingdom),










—


Gleadell Agriculture Limited (‘Gleadell’, United Kingdom), jointly controlled by ADM and Invivo Grains.




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


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for ADM: (i) processing of oilseeds, rapeseed, corn, sugar, wheat and other agricultural commodities; and (ii) manufacturing of vegetable oils and fats, vegetable protein, meal, corn, sweeteners, flour, biodiesel, ethanol and other value added food and feed ingredients,
—   for Gleadell: (i) supply of millers, maltsers, feed compounders and other consumers of grain; and (ii) export of grains, oilseeds and pulses.


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.9262 — ADM/Gleadell Agriculture
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





Email: 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.
Case T-494/18: Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — PO v EEAS
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, equal treatment, pay, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right to education, right to justice, staff regulations (EU), wage determination








C_2019103EN.01006002.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/60






Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — PO v EEAS
(Case T-494/18) (1)

(2019/C 103/79)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 381, 22.10.2018.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 31 January 2019 on the proposal for a Council decision authorising Austria to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2018)0527 — C8-0375/2018 — 2018/0277(NLE))
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Committee on Legal Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Austria, Ecuador, Ukraine, accession to an agreement, child protection, custody, illegal restraint, international convention, parental responsibility








C_2020411EN.01069501.xml










27.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 411/695






P8_TA(2019)0050
Accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
European Parliament legislative resolution of 31 January 2019 on the proposal for a Council decision authorising Austria to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2018)0527 — C8-0375/2018 — 2018/0277(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2020/C 411/56)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2018)0527),










—


having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,










—


having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8-0375/2018),










—


having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice (1) on the exclusive external competence of the European Union for a declaration of acceptance of an accession to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,










—


having regard to Rules 78c and 108(8) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0452/2018),












1.


Approves the authorisation for Austria to accept, in the interest of the European Union, the accession of Ecuador and Ukraine to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction;












2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States, as well as to the Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law.






(1)  Opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014, 1/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2303.
Case T-479/17: Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — PO v EEAS
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, anti-discriminatory measure, equal treatment, monthly pay, parental allowance, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right to education, staff regulations (EU)








C_2019103EN.01005902.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/59






Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — PO v EEAS
(Case T-479/17) (1)

(2019/C 103/76)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Special Report No 03/2019 — ‘European Fund for Strategic Investments: Action needed to make EFSI a full success’
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU budget, EU programme, European Fund for Strategic Investments, European Investment Bank, economic growth, financial control, financing, investment, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2019038EN.01001901.xml










31.1.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 38/19






Special Report No 03/2019
‘European Fund for Strategic Investments: Action needed to make EFSI a full success’
(2019/C 38/07)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 03/2019 ‘European Fund for Strategic Investments: Action needed to make EFSI a full success’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Case T-53/19: Action brought on 31 January 2019 — SBS Bilimsel Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret v EUIPO — Laboratorios Ern (apiheal)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, chemical product, cosmetic product, foodstuff, pharmaceutical product, polishing and scouring preparations, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2019103EN.01005801.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/58






Action brought on 31 January 2019 — SBS Bilimsel Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret v EUIPO — Laboratorios Ern (apiheal)
(Case T-53/19)
(2019/C 103/74)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: SBS Bilimsel Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: M. López Camba, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark apiheal — Application for registration No 14 411 557

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2018 in Case R 1725/2017-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as it refused registration in respect of goods in Classes 30 and 5 (first and third paragraphs of the operative part of that decision);










—


order EUIPO and Laboratorios Ern, SA, to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-373/18: Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 31 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Penafiel — Portugal) — Prosa — Produtos e Serviços Agrícolas v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Indirect taxes on the raising of capital — Directive 69/335/EEC — Articles 4 and 7 — Incorporation of a capital company — Stamp duty in force on 1 July 1984 — Subsequent abolition of that stamp duty, followed by its reintroduction)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: company law, indirect tax, public limited company, share capital, stamp duty, tax exemption, tax law








C_2019172EN.01000401.xml










20.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 172/4






Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 31 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Penafiel — Portugal) — Prosa — Produtos e Serviços Agrícolas v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-373/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Directive 69/335/EEC - Articles 4 and 7 - Incorporation of a capital company - Stamp duty in force on 1 July 1984 - Subsequent abolition of that stamp duty, followed by its reintroduction)
(2019/C 172/04)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Penafiel

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Prosa — Produtos e Serviços Agrícolas

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the order

Article 4(1)(a) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital, as amended by Council Directive 85/303/EEC of 10 June 1985, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation by which a Member State has reintroduced capital duty on the incorporation of a capital company falling within the first of those provisions, which were subject to such duty on 1 July 1984, but which were subsequently exempted from it.


(1)  OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Case T-180/18: Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — VJ v EEAS
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, education grant, equal treatment, pay, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, right to education, right to justice, staff regulations (EU), wage determination








C_2019103EN.01006001.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/60






Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — VJ v EEAS
(Case T-180/18) (1)

(2019/C 103/78)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.