do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 100/2019 of 11 April 2019 amending Annex IX (Financial Services) to the EEA Agreement [2019/1230]
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, United Kingdom, central bank, financial control, financial instrument, financial legislation, financial transaction, market supervision, revision of an agreement, withdrawal from the EU




L_2019192EN.01005501.xml










18.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 192/55








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 100/2019
of 11 April 2019
         
amending Annex IX (Financial Services) to the EEA Agreement [2019/1230]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/462 of 30 January 2019 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1799 as regards the exemption of the Bank of England from the pre- and post-trade transparency requirements in Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annex IX to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following is inserted in point 31bazt (Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1799) of Annex IX to the EEA Agreement:

                  ‘, as amended by:






—



32019 R 0462: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/462 of 30 January 2019 (OJ L 80, 22.3.2019, p. 13).’
                     






Article 2
The text of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/462 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 11 April 2019 or on the day following the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement (*1) or on the day of the entry into force of Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 85/2019 of 29 March 2019 into the EEA Agreement, whichever is the later.


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 11 April 2019.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Claude MAERTEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 80, 22.3.2019, p. 13.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 101/2019 of 11 April 2019 amending Annex IX (Financial Services) to the EEA Agreement [2019/1231]
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, European System of Central Banks, United Kingdom, central bank, financial derivative, financial legislation, financial supervision, public debt, revision of an agreement, withdrawal from the EU




L_2019192EN.01005601.xml










18.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 192/56








            DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 101/2019
of 11 April 2019
         
amending Annex IX (Financial Services) to the EEA Agreement [2019/1231]


THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/460 of 30 January 2019 amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the list of exempted entities (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.












(2)


Annex IX to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following indent is added in point 31bc (Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Annex IX to the EEA Agreement:







‘—



32019 R 0460: Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/460 of 30 January 2019 (OJ L 80, 22.3.2019, p. 8).’







Article 2
The text of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/460 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.


Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 11 April 2019 or on the day following the last notification under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement (*1), whichever is the later.


Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.




Done at Brussels, 11 April 2019.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

Claude MAERTEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 80, 22.3.2019, p. 8.

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.
Case T-225/17: Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Adapta Color v EUIPO — Coatings Foreign IP (Bio proof ADAPTA) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — European Union figurative mark Bio proof ADAPTA — Declaration of partial invalidity by the Board of Appeal — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2007/1001) — No distinctive character acquired by use — Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Infringement of the right to be heard — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) — Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, furniture industry, medical device, metal product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019187EN.01006901.xml










3.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 187/69






Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Adapta Color v EUIPO — Coatings Foreign IP (Bio proof ADAPTA)
(Case T-225/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union figurative mark Bio proof ADAPTA - Declaration of partial invalidity by the Board of Appeal - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2007/1001) - No distinctive character acquired by use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Infringement of the right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)
(2019/C 187/73)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Adapta Color, SL (Peñiscola, Spain) (represented by: G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Coatings Foreign IP Co. LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: A. Rajendra, Solicitor, and by S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2017 (Case R 311/2016-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Coatings Foreign IP and Adapta Color.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Adapta Color, SL to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 202, 26.6.2017.
Case T-226/17: Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Adapta Color v EUIPO — Coatings Foreign IP (Rustproof System ADAPTA) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — European Union word mark Rustproof system ADAPTA — Partial declaration of invalidity by the Board of Appeal — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2007/1001) — No distinctive character acquired by use — Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Infringement of the right to be heard — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) — Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building materials, chemical product, metal product, paints and varnishes, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019206EN.01004001.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/40






Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Adapta Color v EUIPO — Coatings Foreign IP (Rustproof System ADAPTA)
(Case T-226/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union word mark Rustproof system ADAPTA - Partial declaration of invalidity by the Board of Appeal - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2007/1001) - No distinctive character acquired by use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Infringement of the right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)
(2019/C 206/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Adapta Color, SL (Peñiscola, Spain) (represented by: G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Coatings Foreign IP Co. LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: A. Rajendra, Solicitor, and by S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2017 (Case R 2408/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Coatings Foreign IP and Adapta Color.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Adapta Color, SL to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 202, 26.6.2017.
Joined Cases C-473/17 and C-546/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Repsol Butano SA (C-473/17), DISA Gas SAU (C-546/17) v Administración del Estado (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Energy — Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) sector — Consumer protection — Requirement of general economic interest — Maximum price of a bottle of gas — Home delivery obligation — Article 106 TFEU — Directives 2003/55/EC, 2009/73/EC and 2006/123/EC — Interpretation of the judgment of 20 April 2010, Federutility and Others (C-265/08, EU:C:2010:205) — Principle of proportionality)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: assessment of prices, consumer protection, gas, gas supply, maximum price, price of energy, principle of proportionality, services of general interest








C_2019206EN.01000201.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/2






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Repsol Butano SA (C-473/17), DISA Gas SAU (C-546/17) v Administración del Estado
(Joined Cases C-473/17 and C-546/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Energy - Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) sector - Consumer protection - Requirement of general economic interest - Maximum price of a bottle of gas - Home delivery obligation - Article 106 TFEU - Directives 2003/55/EC, 2009/73/EC and 2006/123/EC - Interpretation of the judgment of 20 April 2010, Federutility and Others (C-265/08, EU:C:2010:205) - Principle of proportionality)
(2019/C 206/02)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Repsol Butano SA (C-473/17), DISA Gas SAU (C-546/17)

Defendant: Administración del Estado

Interveners: Redexis Gas SL, Repsol Butano SA (C-546/17)

Operative part of the judgment

The condition of proportionality laid down in Article 15(3)(c) of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market must be interpreted as not precluding measures such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which set a maximum price for bottled liquefied petroleum gas and which require certain operators to carry out home delivery of that gas, provided that those measures are maintained only for a limited duration and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objective of general economic interest pursued.


(1)  OJ C 382, 13.11.2017.

OJ C 412, 4.12.2017.
Case T-202/18: Order of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Bruel v Commission
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Convention on Human Rights, access to EU information, disclosure of information, principle of proportionality, provision of documents, right to justice








C_2019206EN.01009702.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/97






Order of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Bruel v Commission
(Case T-202/18) (1)

(2019/C 206/87)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 166, 14.5.2018.
Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Establishment of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: London, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom, air transport, inland transport, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2019135EN.01001301.xml










11.4.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/13






Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Establishment of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 135/04)






Member State


United Kingdom




Routes concerned


City of Derry Airport to London City Airport
City of Derry Airport to London Gatwick
City of Derry Airport to London Heathrow
City of Derry Airport to London Luton
City of Derry Airport to London Southend
City of Derry Airport to London Stansted




Date of entry into force of the public service obligations


May 2019




Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained


tenders@derrystrabane.com
Case C-690/17: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — ÖKO-Test Verlag GmbH v Dr. Rudolf Liebe Nachf. GmbH & Co. KG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Intellectual property — Trade marks — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 9(1) — Directive 2008/95/EC — Article 5(1) and (2) — Rights afforded by a trade mark — Individual trade mark consisting of a quality label)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, quality label, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019206EN.01000901.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/9






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — ÖKO-Test Verlag GmbH v Dr. Rudolf Liebe Nachf. GmbH & Co. KG
(Case C-690/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Trade marks - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 9(1) - Directive 2008/95/EC - Article 5(1) and (2) - Rights afforded by a trade mark - Individual trade mark consisting of a quality label)
(2019/C 206/10)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ÖKO-Test Verlag GmbH

Defendant: Dr. Rudolf Liebe Nachf. GmbH & Co. KG

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 9(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the [European Union] trade mark, and Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks must be interpreted as meaning that they do not entitle the proprietor of an individual trade mark consisting of a quality label to oppose the affixing, by a third party, of a sign identical with, or similar to, that mark to products that are neither identical with, nor similar to, the goods or services for which that mark is registered.










2.


Article 9(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 and Article 5(2) of Directive 2008/95 must be interpreted as meaning that they entitle the proprietor of an individual trade mark with a reputation, consisting of a quality label, to oppose the affixing, by a third party, of a sign identical with, or similar to, that mark to products that are neither identical with, nor similar to, the goods or services for which that mark is registered, provided that it is established that, by that affixing, the third party takes unfair advantage of the distinctive character or the reputation of the mark concerned or causes detriment to that distinctive character or reputation and provided that, in that case, the third party has not established the existence of a ‘due cause’, within the meaning of those provisions, in support of such affixing.






(1)  OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.
Case C-299/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Torino (Italy) lodged on 11 April 2019 — Techbau SpA v Azienda Sanitaria Locale AL
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: commercial transaction, delivery, goods and services, works contract








C_2019213EN.01001601.xml










24.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/16






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Torino (Italy) lodged on 11 April 2019 — Techbau SpA v Azienda Sanitaria Locale AL
(Case C-299/19)
(2019/C 213/15)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale ordinario di Torino

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Techbau SpA

Defendant: Azienda Sanitaria Locale AL

Question referred

Does Article 2(1) of Directive 2000/35/EC (1) preclude a national provision, such as Article 2(1)(a) of Legislative Decree No 231 of 9 October 2002, which excludes works contracts, whether public or private, and specifically public works contracts within the meaning of Directive 93/37/EEC, (2) from the concept of ‘commercial transaction’ — defined as contracts that ‘lead, exclusively or primarily, to the delivery of goods or the provision of services in exchange for remuneration’ — and therefore from the scope of that directive?


(1)  Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in commercial transactions (OJ 2000 L 200, p. 35).

(2)  Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54).
Case T-244/19: Action brought on 11 April 2019 — Café Camelo v EUIPO — Camel Brand (CAMEL BRAND FOOD PRODUCTS)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, foodstuff, milk product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019206EN.01009001.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/90






Action brought on 11 April 2019 — Café Camelo v EUIPO — Camel Brand (CAMEL BRAND FOOD PRODUCTS)
(Case T-244/19)
(2019/C 206/79)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Café Camelo, SL (Villanueva del Pardillo, Spain) (represented by: M. de Justo Bailey, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Camel Brand Co. Ltd (Zebbug, Malta)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union trade mark — Application for registration No 15 710 692

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2019 in Case R 1165/2018-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision.










—


order the defendant (and intervener, if he enters an appearance in 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 C-254/18: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Syndicat des cadres de la sécurité intérieure v Premier ministre, Ministre de l’Intérieur, Ministre de l’Action et des Comptes publics (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2003/88/EC — Organisation of working time — Protection of the safety and health of workers — Maximum weekly working time — Reference period — Rolling or fixed nature — Derogation — Police officers)
Date: 2019-04-11
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arrangement of working time, labour standard, legal working time, occupational safety, police








C_2019206EN.01001401.xml










17.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 206/14






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Syndicat des cadres de la sécurité intérieure v Premier ministre, Ministre de l’Intérieur, Ministre de l’Action et des Comptes publics
(Case C-254/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2003/88/EC - Organisation of working time - Protection of the safety and health of workers - Maximum weekly working time - Reference period - Rolling or fixed nature - Derogation - Police officers)
(2019/C 206/16)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Syndicat des cadres de la sécurité intérieure

Defendants: Premier ministre, Ministre de l’Intérieur, Ministre de l’Action et des Comptes publics

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(b), Article 16(b) and the first paragraph of Article 19 of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which lays down, for the purpose of calculating the average weekly working time, reference periods which start and end on fixed calendar dates, provided that that legislation contains mechanisms which make it possible to ensure that the maximum average weekly working time of 48 hours is respected during each six-month period straddling two consecutive fixed reference periods.


(1)  OJ C 211, 18.6.2018.