do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-84/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Szczecin — Prawobrzeże i Zachód w Szczecinie (Poland) lodged on 31 January 2019 — Profi Credit Polska S.A. v QJ
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer information, cost of borrowing, unfair terms of contract








C_2019164EN.01001701.xml










13.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/17






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Szczecin — Prawobrzeże i Zachód w Szczecinie (Poland) lodged on 31 January 2019 — Profi Credit Polska S.A. v QJ
(Case C-84/19)
(2019/C 164/19)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy Szczecin — Prawobrzeże i Zachód w Szczecinie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Profi Credit Polska S.A.

Defendant: QJ

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 1(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 (1) be interpreted as precluding the application of the provisions of the directive in regard to the examination of the fairness of individual contractual terms concerning non-interest credit costs, in the case where the legislative provisions in force in a Member State impose an upper limit on those costs by providing that non-interest credit costs arising from a consumer credit agreement are not payable in excess of the maximum non-interest credit costs calculated in the manner prescribed by law or the total amount of the credit?










2.


Must Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 be interpreted as meaning that a non-interest cost incurred and paid by a borrower together with a loan, in addition to interest, related to the conclusion of the agreement and the granting of the loan itself (in the form of a fee, commission or otherwise), as a term of that agreement, is, if expressed in plain intelligible language, not subject to the assessment expressed in that provision in the context of its unfairness?










3.


Must Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 be interpreted as meaning that contractual terms which introduce various types of costs associated with the granting of a loan are not expressed ‘in plain intelligible language’ if they do not explain in return for what specific services they are charged and do not allow the consumer to determine the differences between them?






(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
Case T-97/18: Judgment of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — DeepMind Technologies v EUIPO (STREAMS) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark STREAMS — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) and 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Previous EUIPO practice)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical computing, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019103EN.01003901.xml










18.3.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 103/39






Judgment of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — DeepMind Technologies v EUIPO (STREAMS)
(Case T-97/18) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark STREAMS - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) and 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Previous EUIPO practice))
(2019/C 103/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: DeepMind Technologies Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. St Quintin, Barrister, K. Gilbert and G. Lodge, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek and D. Walicka, and subsequently by V. Ruzek and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2017 (Case R 35/2017-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign STREAMS as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders DeepMind Technologies Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Case T-18/18: Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — Lillelam v EUIPO — Pfaff (LITTLE LAMB)
Date: 2019-01-31
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019122EN.01003202.xml










1.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 122/32






Order of the General Court of 31 January 2019 — Lillelam v EUIPO — Pfaff (LITTLE LAMB)
(Case T-18/18) (1)

(2019/C 122/38)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 94, 12.3.2018.