do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-477/18: Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Užstato sistemos administratorius v EUIPO — DPG Deutsche Pfandsystem (Representation of a bottle with an arrow) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for an EU figurative mark representing a bottle and an arrow — Earlier EU figurative mark representing a can, a bottle and an arrow — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, consultancy, packaging product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, waste disposal, waste recycling








C_2019187EN.01007801.xml










3.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/78






Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Užstato sistemos administratorius v EUIPO — DPG Deutsche Pfandsystem (Representation of a bottle with an arrow)
(Case T-477/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a bottle and an arrow - Earlier EU figurative mark representing a can, a bottle and an arrow - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 187/84)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Užstato sistemos administratorius VŠĮ (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: I. Lukauskienė, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Sipos and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: DPG Deutsche Pfandsystem GmbH (Berlin, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 May 2018 (Case R 2203/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between DPG Deutsche Pfandsystem and Užstato sistemos administratorius.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Užstato sistemos administratorius VšĮ to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 341, 24.9.2018.
C-646/18: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Gerona — Spain) — OD v Ryanair (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, indemnification, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction








C_2019280EN.01001201.xml










19.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 280/12






Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Gerona — Spain) — OD v Ryanair
(C-646/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight - Article 26 - Implied prorogation - Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance)
(2019/C 280/14)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Gerona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: OD

Defendant: Ryanair D.A.C.

Operative part of the order

Article 26(1) 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, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not apply in a case, such as that in the main proceedings, where the defendant has not submitted observations and has not appeared.


(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Case C-464/18: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Gerona — Spain) — ZX v Ryanair DAC (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, branch, carrier, indemnification, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction








C_2019206EN.01001701.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/17






Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Gerona — Spain) — ZX v Ryanair DAC
(Case C-464/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight - Article 7(5) - Operations of a branch - Article 26 - Implied prorogation - Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance)
(2019/C 206/21)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 1 de Gerona

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ZX

Defendant: Ryanair DAC

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 7(5) 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 must be interpreted as meaning that a court of a Member State does not have jurisdiction to hear a dispute concerning a claim for compensation brought under Article 7 of 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, and directed against an airline, established in the territory of another Member State, on the ground that that company has a branch within the territorial jurisdiction of the court seised, without that branch having been involved in the legal relationship between the airline and the passenger concerned.










2.


Article 26(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as not applying in a case, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, where the defendant has not submitted observations or entered an appearance.






(1)  OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.
Case T-403/18: Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Pharmadom v EUIPO — Objectif Pharma (WS wellpharma shop) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark WS wellpharma shop — Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, medical device, medical research, pharmaceutical product, pharmacy, registered trade mark, research and development, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_2019187EN.01007701.xml










3.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/77






Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Pharmadom v EUIPO — Objectif Pharma (WS wellpharma shop)
(Case T-403/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark WS wellpharma shop - Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 187/82)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Pharmadom (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: M.-P. Dauquaire, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Pétrequin and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Objectif Pharma (Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France) (represented by: A. Nappey, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 March 2018 (Case R 1448/2017-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Pharmadom and Objectif Pharma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Pharmadom to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 301, 27.8.2018.
Case C-657/18: Order of the Court of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Općinski sud u Novom Zagrebu — Croatia) — Hrvatska radiotelevizija v TY (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 — European Enforcement Order — Notaries acting in enforcement proceedings based on an authentic document — Ex parte proceedings — Article 18 TFEU — Reverse discrimination — Lack of connection to EU law — Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: enforcement of ruling, equal treatment, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, notary, official document








C_2019280EN.01001202.xml










19.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 280/12






Order of the Court of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Općinski sud u Novom Zagrebu — Croatia) — Hrvatska radiotelevizija v TY
(Case C-657/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 - European Enforcement Order - Notaries acting in enforcement proceedings based on an authentic document - Ex parte proceedings - Article 18 TFEU - Reverse discrimination - Lack of connection to EU law - Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court)
(2019/C 280/15)
Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Općinski sud u Novom Zagrebu

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Hrvatska radiotelevizija

Defendant: TY

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union manifestly lacks jurisdiction to answer the questions referred by the Općinski sud u Novom Zagrebu (Municipal Court, New Zagreb, Croatia).


(1)  OJ C 4, 7.1.2019.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019135EN.01001201.xml










11.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/12






Euro exchange rates (1)

10 April 2019
(2019/C 135/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1279 




JPY


Japanese yen


125,38 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4652 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86083 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,4400 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1280 




ISK


Iceland króna


134,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,5895 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,608 




HUF


Hungarian forint


321,84 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2833 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7605 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,4144 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5785 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5032 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8405 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6697 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5258 




KRW


South Korean won


1 283,09 




ZAR


South African rand


15,7391 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,5758 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4253 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 959,79 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6328 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,543 




RUB


Russian rouble


72,8600 




THB


Thai baht


35,839 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,3301 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,2783 




INR


Indian rupee


77,9945 






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