do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-135/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 20 February 2019 —Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v CW
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disability insurance, health insurance, pension scheme, residence, social-security harmonisation, unemployment insurance








C_2019172EN.01001401.xml










20.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 172/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 20 February 2019 — Pensionsversicherungsanstalt v CW
(Case C-135/19)
(2019/C 172/17)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Pensionsversicherungsanstalt

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: CW

Questions referred







1.


Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, (1) is the Austrian rehabilitation allowance to be regarded






—


as a sickness benefit pursuant to Article 3(1)(a) of the regulation, or










—


as an invalidity benefit pursuant to Article 3(1)(c) of the regulation, or










—


as an unemployment benefit pursuant to Article 3(1)(h) of the regulation?














2.


In the light of primary law, is Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 to be interpreted as meaning that, as the former State of residence and State of employment, a Member State is obliged to pay benefits such as the Austrian rehabilitation allowance to a person who is resident in another Member State if that person completed the majority of the periods of insurance from the sickness and pension branches as an employee in that other Member State (after the transfer of residence to that country years previously) and has not since then received benefits from the health and pension insurance scheme of the former State of residence and employment?






(1)  OJ 2004 L 166, p. 1.
Case C-147/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 20 February 2019 — Atresm dia Corporación de Medios de Comunicación, S.A. v Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI) and Artistas e Intérpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE)
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: audiovisual production, copyright, income in addition to normal pay, sound reproduction equipment, television








C_2019182EN.01001801.xml










27.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 20 February 2019 — Atresm dia Corporación de Medios de Comunicación, S.A. v Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI) and Artistas e Intérpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE)
(Case C-147/19)
(2019/C 182/21)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Atresmedia Corporación de Medios de Comunicación, S.A.

Respondents: Asociación de Gestión de Derechos Intelectuales (AGEDI) and Artistas e Intérpretes o Ejecutantes, Sociedad de Gestión de España (AIE)

Questions referred







1.


Does the concept of the ‘reproduction of a phonogram published for commercial purposes’ referred to in Article 8(2) of Directives 92/100 (1) and 2006/115 (2) include the reproduction of a phonogram published for commercial purposes in an audiovisual recording containing the fixation of an audiovisual work?










2.


In the event that the answer to the previous question is in the affirmative, is a television broadcasting organisation which, for any type of communication to the public, uses an audiovisual recording containing the fixation of a cinematographic or audiovisual work in which a phonogram published for commercial purposes has been reproduced, under an obligation to pay the single equitable remuneration provided for in Article 8(2) of the aforementioned directives?






(1)  Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (OJ 1992 L 346, p. 61).

(2)  Directive 2006/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 28).
Case T-109/19: Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Kerry Luxembourg/EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense)
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, adjuvant, beverage, dental medicine, food additive, foodstuff, fruit, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable








C_2019139EN.01009101.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/91






Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Kerry Luxembourg/EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense)
(Case T-109/19)
(2019/C 139/90)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Döhler GmbH (Darmstadt, Germany)

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 figurative mark TasteSense –Application for registration No 15 820 525

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2018 in Case R 1178/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


dismiss the opposition brought by Döhler GmbH against the registration of the mark TasteSense By Kerry No. 15 820 525;










—


order EUIPO and Döhler, if it should intervene in these proceedings, to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-105/19: Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Louis Vuitton Malletier/EUIPO — Wisniewski (Representation of a chequerboard pattern)
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019139EN.01008601.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/86






Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Louis Vuitton Malletier/EUIPO — Wisniewski (Representation of a chequerboard pattern)
(Case T-105/19)
(2019/C 139/87)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Louis Vuitton Malletier (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, G. Lazzeretti, N. Parrotta and F. Rossi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Norbert Wisniewski (Warsaw, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark representing a chequerboard pattern — International registration designating the European Union No 2 829 851

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2018 in Case R 274/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs incurred by the applicant during these proceedings;










—


order Norbert Wisniewski to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in these proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 59(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-111/19: Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Boshab v Council
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2019139EN.01009202.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/92






Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Boshab v Council
(Case T-111/19)
(2019/C 139/92)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Évariste Boshab (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois, and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 8 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 8 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;










—


rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 1183/2005/EC are unlawful;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are in essence identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/19, Mende Omalanga v Council.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 as regards certain rules relating to the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund by reason of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union’ (COM(2019) 48 final — 2019/0009 (COD))
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee, Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment
Subjects: EU waters, European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, United Kingdom, common fisheries policy, exclusive economic zone, fishing area, fishing vessel, sea fishing, territorial waters, withdrawal from the EU








C_2019190EN.01005301.xml










5.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/53






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 as regards certain rules relating to the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund by reason of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union’

(COM(2019) 48 final — 2019/0009 (COD))

(2019/C 190/10)






Referral


European Parliament, 30.1.2019
Council of the European Union, 6.2.2019




Legal basis


Articles 43(2) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment




Adopted at plenary session


20.2.2019




Plenary session No


541 




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


159/0/2




Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 541st plenary session of 20 and 21 February 2019 (meeting of 20 February), by 159 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 20 February 2019.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER
Case T-113/19: Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Kampete v Council
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2019139EN.01009401.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/94






Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Kampete v Council
(Case T-113/19)
(2019/C 139/94)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ilunga Kampete (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois, and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 1 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 1 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;










—


rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 1183/2005/EC are unlawful;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are in essence identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/19, Mende Omalanga v Council.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2403 as regards fishing authorisations for Union fishing vessels in United Kingdom waters and fishing operations of United Kingdom fishing vessels in Union waters’ (COM(2019) 49 final — 2019/0010 (COD))
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee, Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment
Subjects: EU waters, United Kingdom, exchange of information, fishery management, fishing area, fishing fleet, fishing industry, fishing permit, ship's flag, withdrawal from the EU








C_2019190EN.01005401.xml










5.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/54






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2403 as regards fishing authorisations for Union fishing vessels in United Kingdom waters and fishing operations of United Kingdom fishing vessels in Union waters’

(COM(2019) 49 final — 2019/0010 (COD))

(2019/C 190/11)






Referral


European Parliament, 30.1.2019
Council of the European Union, 06.2.2019




Legal basis


Articles 43(2) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment




Adopted at plenary session


20.2.2019




Plenary session No


541 




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


171/0/2




Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 541st plenary session of 20 and 21 February 2019 (meeting of 20 February), by 171 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 20 February 2019.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER
Case T-122/19: Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Ramazani Shadary v Council
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2019139EN.01010001.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/100






Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Ramazani Shadary v Council
(Case T-122/19)
(2019/C 139/102)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois, and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 13 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 13 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;










—


rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 1183/2005/EC are unlawful;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are in essence identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/19, Mende Omalanga v Council.
Case T-120/19: Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Numbi v Council
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Democratic Republic of the Congo, EU restrictive measure, arms control, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality, protection of privacy, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2019139EN.01009901.xml










15.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 139/99






Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Numbi v Council
(Case T-120/19)
(2019/C 139/100)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: John Numbi (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois, and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 5 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;










—


annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 5 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;










—


rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(a) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) 1183/2005/EC are unlawful;










—


order the Council to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are in essence identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/19, Mende Omalanga v Council.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down provisions for the continuation of ongoing learning mobility activities under the Erasmus+ programme in the context of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (‘‘United Kingdom’’) from the European Union’ (COM(2019) 65 final — 2019/0030 (COD))
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee, Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship
Subjects: EU programme, EU sport policy, United Kingdom, cooperation in the field of education, education, education policy, student mobility, vocational training, withdrawal from the EU, youth policy








C_2019190EN.01005201.xml










5.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 190/52






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down provisions for the continuation of ongoing learning mobility activities under the Erasmus+ programme in the context of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (‘‘United Kingdom’’) from the European Union’

(COM(2019) 65 final — 2019/0030 (COD))

(2019/C 190/09)






Referral


European Parliament, 30.1.2019
Council of the European Union, 12.2.2019




Legal basis


Articles 165(4), 166(4) and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship




Adopted at plenary


20.2.2019




Plenary session No


541 




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


152/0/1




Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 541st plenary session of 20 and 21 February 2019 (meeting of 20 February 2019), unanimously, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 20 February 2019.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Luca JAHIER
Case C-137/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 20 February 2019 — B.M.O. v État belge
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: age of majority, dependant, family migration, foreign national, infancy, residence permit








C_2019164EN.01002201.xml










13.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 164/22






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 20 February 2019 — B.M.O. v État belge
(Case C-137/19)
(2019/C 164/25)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: B.M.O.

Defendant: État belge

Question referred

Must Article 4(1)(c) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, (1) read where appropriate with Article 16(1) of that directive, be interpreted as requiring that third country nationals, in order to be classified as ‘minor children’ within the meaning of that provision, must be ‘minors’ not only at the time of submitting the application for leave to reside but also at the time when the administration eventually determines that application?


(1)  OJ 2003 L 251, p. 12.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-02-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019067EN.01000401.xml










20.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 67/4






Euro exchange rates (1)

19 February 2019
(2019/C 67/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1294 




JPY


Japanese yen


125,09 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4619 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87185 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6000 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1351 




ISK


Iceland króna


135,70 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7460 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,717 




HUF


Hungarian forint


318,46 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3347 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7492 




TRY


Turkish lira


5,9957 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5881 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4961 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8644 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6549 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5324 




KRW


South Korean won


1 273,50 




ZAR


South African rand


16,0000 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6418 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4130 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 926,80 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6154 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,970 




RUB


Russian rouble


74,7569 




THB


Thai baht


35,249 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,2039 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,7044 




INR


Indian rupee


80,6985 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.