do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-312/19: Action brought on 21 May 2019 — Wilhelm Sihn jr. v EUIPO — Golden Frog (CHAMELEON)
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, data transmission, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019230EN.01006301.xml










8.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 230/63






Action brought on 21 May 2019 — Wilhelm Sihn jr. v EUIPO — Golden Frog (CHAMELEON)
(Case T-312/19)
(2019/C 230/76)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Wilhelm Sihn jr. GmbH & Co. KG (Niefern-Öschelbronn, Germany) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Golden Frog GmbH (Meggen, Suisse)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark CHAMELEON — Application for registration No 12 567 269

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 March 2019 in Case R 1551/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Wilhelm Sihn jr. GmbH & Co. KG;










—


order Golden Frog GmbH to bear its own costs in case of an intervention.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 27(4) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-393/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Apelativen sad — Plovdiv (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 May 2019 — Criminal proceedings against OM
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bulgaria, confiscation of property, criminal law, illicit trade, means of transport, national law, offence, ownership, right to justice, staff








C_2019295EN.01000501.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/5






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Apelativen sad — Plovdiv (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 May 2019 — Criminal proceedings against OM
(Case C-393/19)
(2019/C 295/08)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Apelativen sad — Plovdiv

Party to the main proceedings

OM

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that a national provision such as that pursuant to Article 242(8) of the Nakazatelen kodeks (Criminal Code, ‘the NK’) of the Republic of Bulgaria, according to which a means of transport used to commit aggravated smuggling which belongs to a third person who neither knew nor could or should have known that its employee was committing the offence must be confiscated for the benefit of the State, is unlawful on the grounds that it undermines the fair balance between the public interest and the need to protect the right to property?










2.


Is Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that a national provision such as that pursuant to Article 242(8) of the NK, according to which a means of transport owned by a person who is not the person who committed the offence can be confiscated without the owner being guaranteed direct access to the courts to state its case, is unlawful?
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019174EN.01000201.xml










21.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 174/2






Euro exchange rates (1)

20 May 2019
(2019/C 174/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1167 




JPY


Japanese yen


122,67 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4681 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87620 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,7668 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1263 




ISK


Iceland króna


137,80 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,7978 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,766 




HUF


Hungarian forint


325,77 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2968 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7597 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,7315 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6141 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5000 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,7656 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7071 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5366 




KRW


South Korean won


1 333,12 




ZAR


South African rand


16,0392 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7228 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4268 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 166,80 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6712 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,866 




RUB


Russian rouble


72,0519 




THB


Thai baht


35,567 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,5666 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,3388 




INR


Indian rupee


77,7860 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2019/846 of 21 May 2019 appointing two members of the Court of Auditors
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Croatia, European Court of Auditors, Romania, appointment of members








L_2019138EN.01008901.xml










24.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 138/89








            COUNCIL DECISION (EU, Euratom) 2019/846
of 21 May 2019
         
appointing two members of the Court of Auditors


THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 286(2) thereof,


Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a thereof,


Having regard to the proposals by Romania and the Republic of Croatia,


Having regard to the opinions of the European Parliament (1),

Whereas:







(1)


The term of office of Mr George PUFAN is due to expire on 30 June 2019.












(2)


The term of office of Mr Neven MATES is due to expire on 14 July 2019.












(3)


Two new members should therefore be appointed to the Court of Auditors,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
The following are hereby appointed members of the Court of Auditors:






(a)


Mr Viorel ȘTEFAN for the period from 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2025;










(b)


Ms Ivana MALETIĆ for the period from 15 July 2019 to 14 July 2025.






Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.




Done at Brussels, 21 May 2019.


For the Council


The President

G. CIAMBA
            





(1)  Opinions of 16 April 2019 (not yet published in the Official Journal).
Case C-525/18 P: Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 May 2019 — Marion Le Pen v European Parliament, Council of the European Union (Appeal — European Parliament — Rules governing the expenses and allowances of Members of the European Parliament — Parliamentary assistance allowance — Recovery of sums unduly paid)
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, allowances and expenses, servant (EU)








C_2019288EN.01000701.xml










26.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/7






Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 May 2019 — Marion Le Pen v European Parliament, Council of the European Union
(Case C-525/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - European Parliament - Rules governing the expenses and allowances of Members of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid)
(2019/C 288/07)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Marion Le Pen (represented by: R. Bosselut, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Parliament (represented by: S. Seyr and C. Burgos, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: A. F. Jensen, M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded.










2.


Ms Marion Le Pen shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 381, 22.10.2018.
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: chemical compound, chemical product, health control, health risk, market approval, marketing standard, medical diagnosis








C_2019174EN.01000401.xml










21.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 174/4






Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1)
)

(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 174/05)

Decisions granting an authorisation













Reference of the decision (2)



Date of decision


Substance name


Holder of the authorisation


Authorisation numbers


Authorised use


Date of expiry of review period


Reasons for the decision




C(2019) 3477


14 May 2019


Bis(2-methoxyethyl) ether (diglyme)
EC No: 203-924-4
CAS No. 111-96-6


Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Sandhoferstrasse 116, 68305, Mannheim, Germany


REACH/19/19/0


Use as a process chemical in the manufacture of one specific type of Dynabeads® used in immunodiagnostic assays (in vitro diagnostic)


22 August 2029


Risk is adequately controlled in accordance with Article 60(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.
There are no suitable alternatives.






(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
Case C-235/17: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 May 2019 — European Commission v Hungary (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 63 TFEU — Free movement of capital — Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Right to property — National legislation extinguishing, without compensation, the rights of usufruct over agricultural and forestry land acquired by legal persons or by natural persons who cannot demonstrate a close family tie with the owner of the land)
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for failure to fulfil an obligation, agricultural land, family relationship, forest, free movement of capital, infringement procedure (EU), usufruct








C_2019255EN.01000301.xml










29.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 255/3






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 May 2019 — European Commission v Hungary
(Case C-235/17) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 63 TFEU - Free movement of capital - Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to property - National legislation extinguishing, without compensation, the rights of usufruct over agricultural and forestry land acquired by legal persons or by natural persons who cannot demonstrate a close family tie with the owner of the land)
(2019/C 255/03)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Malferrari and L. Havas, Agents)

Defendant: Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér, Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by adopting Paragraph 108(1) of mező- és erdőgazdasági földek forgalmáról szóló 2013. évi CXXII. törvénnyel összefüggő egyes rendelkezésekről és átmeneti szabályokról szóló 2013. évi CCXII. törvény (Law No CCXII of 2013 laying down various provisions and transitional measures concerning Law No CXXII of 2013 on transactions in agricultural and forestry land) and thereby cancelling, by operation of law, the rights of usufruct over agricultural and forestry land located in Hungary that are held, directly or indirectly, by nationals of other Member States, Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU in conjunction with Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;










2.


Orders Hungary to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 412, 4.12.2017.
Case C-391/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 May 2019 — ‘Unipack’ AD v Direktor na Teritorialna direktsia ‘Dunavska’ of the Agentsia ‘Mitnitsi’, The Public Prosecutor at the Varhovna administrativna prokuratura of the Republic of Bulgaria
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, EU customs procedure, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), import licence, originating product








C_2019280EN.01002401.xml










19.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 280/24






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 May 2019 — ‘Unipack’ AD v Direktor na Teritorialna direktsia ‘Dunavska’ of the Agentsia ‘Mitnitsi’, The Public Prosecutor at the Varhovna administrativna prokuratura of the Republic of Bulgaria
(Case C-391/19)
(2019/C 280/32)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Varhoven administrativen sad

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant in the appeal on a point of law:‘Unipack’ AD

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Direktor na Teritorialna direktsia ‘Dunavska’ of the Agentsia ‘Mitnitsi’, The Public Prosecutor at the Varhovna administrativna prokuratura of the Republic of Bulgaria

Question referred

Does it constitute exceptional circumstances within the meaning of Article 172(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 (1) of 28 July 2015 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards detailed rules concerning certain provisions of the Union Customs Code, which would provide a basis for the granting of authorisation with retroactive effect pursuant to Article 211(2) of the Union Customs Code for the use of the end-use customs procedure pursuant to Article 254 of the Union Customs Code in relation to an import of products that took place before the date of acceptance of the application for authorisation and after the expiry of the validity of a BTI decision in favour of the holder of the procedure for those products due to an amendment to the Combined Nomenclature, if, in the period (of approximately 10 months) between the expiry of the validity of the BTI decision and the import for which the use of the end-use procedure was requested, several (nine) imports of products were made without the customs authorities having corrected the declared Combined Nomenclature code, and the goods were used for a purpose exempted from the anti-dumping duty?


(1)  OJ 2015 L 343, p. 1.
Case C-394/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 21 May 2019 — PN, QO, RP, SQ, TR v Centre public d’action sociale d’Anderlecht (CPAS)
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: foreign national, freedom of movement, national implementing measure, principle of proportionality, residence permit, social services








C_2019246EN.01001401.xml










22.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/14






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 21 May 2019 — PN, QO, RP, SQ, TR v Centre public d’action sociale d’Anderlecht (CPAS)
(Case C-394/19)
(2019/C 246/14)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: PN, QO, RP, SQ, TR

Defendant: Centre public d’action sociale d’Anderlecht (CPAS)

Question referred

Is the principle of full effectiveness of the rules of European Law and the protection of those rules, as defined in the Francovich and Brasserie du pêcheur judgments, in conjunction with Directive 2004/38/EC, (1) to be interpreted as imposing an obligation on a Member State, in circumstances where the right of residence of a foreign national has been withdrawn without prior consideration of proportionality, as a result of an error in transposition into domestic law, to cover, within the framework of its welfare system, the basic needs of the applicant other than medical needs, until the applicant’s position as regards the right of residence has been determined in conformity with EU law?


(1)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77).
Case C-392/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 21 May 2019 — VG Bild-Kunst v Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz
Date: 2019-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet site, copyright








C_2019270EN.01002002.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/20






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 21 May 2019 — VG Bild-Kunst v Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz
(Case C-392/19)
(2019/C 270/23)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant in the appeal on a point of law: VG Bild-Kunst

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz

Question referred

Does the embedding of a work — which is available on a freely accessible website with the consent of the rightholder — in the website of a third party by way of framing constitute communication to the public of that work within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC (1) where it occurs through circumvention of protection measures against framing taken or instigated by the rightholder?


(1)  Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10).