do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-358/19: Action brought on 13 June 2019 — Groupe Canal + v Commission
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, cultural pluralism, domestic market, film industry, geo-blocking, principle of proportionality








C_2019270EN.01003502.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/35






Action brought on 13 June 2019 — Groupe Canal + v Commission
(Case T-358/19)
(2019/C 270/37)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Groupe Canal + (Issy-les-Moulineaux, France) (represented by: P. Wilhelm, P. Gassenbach and O. de Juvigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the action admissible and well-founded;










—


annul, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the Commission Decision of 7 March 2019 in Case AT.40023 so far as concerns the French market and the existing and future contracts of Groupe Canal +;










—


order the Commission to pay all of the costs incurred by the company Groupe Canal +.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging misuse of powers by the Commission in so far as the commitments, which it rendered binding, for the purposes of ending geo-blocking in the field of cinema interfere with the legislative reforms recently adopted by the EU legislature.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission made a manifest error of assessment in relation to Article 101(1) TFEU in so far as it found that the commitments proposed by NBCUniversal, Sony Pictures, Warner Bros and Sky do not affect the cultural diversity and more generally the financing and exploitation of films in the European Economic Area.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the principle of proportionality in that the Commission made binding a number of commitments which were manifestly disproportionate to the competition concerns raised and which infringed the interests of third parties.
Case C-646/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Brindisi — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Gianluca Moro (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Directive 2012/13/EU — Right to information in criminal proceedings — Article 6(4) — Right of a person to be informed about the accusation against him — Being informed about any change in the information provided when that is necessary to safeguard the fairness of the proceedings — Change in the legal classification of the acts upon which the accusation is based — The accused person being unable to request, during the trial proceedings, the imposition of a negotiated penalty provided for under national law — Difference in the event of a change in the facts on which the accusation is based)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: alternative sentence, charge, criminal proceedings, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, right to information, rights of the defence








C_2019263EN.01000601.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/6






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Brindisi — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Gianluca Moro
(Case C-646/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Directive 2012/13/EU - Right to information in criminal proceedings - Article 6(4) - Right of a person to be informed about the accusation against him - Being informed about any change in the information provided when that is necessary to safeguard the fairness of the proceedings - Change in the legal classification of the acts upon which the accusation is based - The accused person being unable to request, during the trial proceedings, the imposition of a negotiated penalty provided for under national law - Difference in the event of a change in the facts on which the accusation is based)
(2019/C 263/06)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Brindisi

Parties in the main criminal proceedings

Gianluca Moro

Operative part of the judgment

Article 6(4) of Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings, and Article 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which the accused person may request, during the trial proceedings, the imposition of a negotiated penalty in the event of a change in the facts on which the accusation is based, and not in the event of a change in the legal classification of the acts on which the accusation is based.


(1)  OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.
Case C-505/18: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Copebi SCA v Établissement national des produits de l'agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — State aid — Decision 2009/402/EC — Contingency plans in the fruit and vegetable sector implemented by the French Republic — Finding that the aid is incompatible — Recovery order — Scope of the decision — Economic agricultural committees)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, State aid, aid to agriculture, control of State aid, fruit-growing, producer organisation, reimbursement of aid, stone fruit








C_2019263EN.01002002.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/20






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Copebi SCA v Établissement national des produits de l'agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)
(Case C-505/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - State aid - Decision 2009/402/EC - Contingency plans in the fruit and vegetable sector implemented by the French Republic - Finding that the aid is incompatible - Recovery order - Scope of the decision - Economic agricultural committees)
(2019/C 263/25)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Copebi SCA

Respondent: Etablissement national des produits de l'agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)

Other party: Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation

Operative part of the judgment

Commission Decision 2009/402/EC of 28 January 2009 on the ‘contingency plans’ in the fruit and vegetable sector implemented by France must be interpreted as covering aid paid by the Office national interprofessionnel des fruits, des légumes et de l’horticulture (ONIFLHOR) (National Fruit, Vegetables and Horticulture Trade Board) to the comité économique bigarreau industrie (CEBI) (Economic Committee for the Whiteheart Cherry Industry) and allocated to producers of whiteheart cherries for industrial uses by the producer groups which are members of that committee, even though first, the CEBI is not one of the eight economic agricultural committees referred to in that decision and, second, that aid, unlike the financing mechanism described in that decision, was financed only by subsidies from ONIFLHOR and not also by voluntary contributions from producers.


(1)  OJ C 364, 8.10.2018.
Case T-652/18: Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Porus v EUIPO (oral Dialysis) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark oral Dialysis — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2019280EN.01004101.xml










19.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 280/41






Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Porus v EUIPO (oral Dialysis)
(Case T-652/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark oral Dialysis - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 280/57)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Porus GmbH (Monheim am Rhein, Germany) (represented by: C. Weil, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Schneider and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 September 2018 (Case R 1375/2018-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign oral Dialysis as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Porus GmbH to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 4, 7.1.2019.
Case T-392/18: Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Innocenti v EUIPO —Gemelli (Innocenti) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU work mark Innocenti — Earlier national figurative mark i INNOCENTI — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, polishing and scouring preparations, precious metal, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, trade-mark law, vehicle








C_2019263EN.01004701.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/47






Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Innocenti v EUIPO —Gemelli (Innocenti)
(Case T-392/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU work mark Innocenti - Earlier national figurative mark i INNOCENTI - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 263/53)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Innocenti SA (Lugano, Switzerland) (represented by: N. Ferretti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Filippo Gemelli (Turin, Italy) (initially represent by: C. Renna, and subsequently by F. Canu, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 April 2018 (Case R 2336/2010-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Gemelli and Innocenti.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Innocenti SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred in the present proceedings by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Mr Filippo Gemelli.







(1)  OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.
Case C-450/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 13 June 2019 — Kilpailu- ja kuluttajavirasto
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cartel, competition policy, invitation to tender, payment, restriction on competition, tendering, works contract








C_2019280EN.01002601.xml










19.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 280/26






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 13 June 2019 — Kilpailu- ja kuluttajavirasto
(Case C-450/19)
(2019/C 280/35)
Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein hallinto-oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Kilpailu- ja kuluttajavirasto

Defendant: Eltel Group Oy ja Eltel Networks Oy

Questions referred







1.


Can the system of competition established by Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) be interpreted to mean that, in a situation in which a cartel participant has entered into a construction contract as agreed in the cartel with a player outside the cartel, the competition infringement continues, due to the economic effects caused thereby, throughout the whole period in which contractual obligations arising from the contract are discharged or payments for the works are made to the contracting parties, that is to say up until the point at which the last instalment is paid for the works, or at least up until the point at which the works in question are completed;










2.


or is it to be assumed that the competition infringement continues only until the point at which the company that committed the infringement has submitted a tender for the works concerned or entered into a contract for the execution of the works?
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8934 — Danske Bank/DNB/Nordea Bank/SEB/Svenska Handelsbanken/Swedbank/KYC Utility) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: bank, banking, economic concentration, merger control








C_2019210EN.01000701.xml










21.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 210/7






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.8934 — Danske Bank/DNB/Nordea Bank/SEB/Svenska Handelsbanken/Swedbank/KYC Utility)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 210/03)
On 13 June 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M8934. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-248/17 RENV: Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — CC v Parliament (Liability — Civil service — Recruitment — Open Competition EUR/A/151/98 — Errors committed by the European Parliament in the management of the reserve list — Material loss)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), indemnification, recruitment








C_2019263EN.01004001.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/40






Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — CC v Parliament
(Case T-248/17 RENV) (1)

(Liability - Civil service - Recruitment - Open Competition EUR/A/151/98 - Errors committed by the European Parliament in the management of the reserve list - Material loss)
(2019/C 263/44)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: CC (represented by: G. Maximini and C. Hölzer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Ecker and E. Despotopoulou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of various errors committed by the Parliament in the management of the reserve list of Open Competition EUR/A/151/98.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Orders the European Parliament to pay CC the sum of EUR 6 000;











2.



Dismisses the action as to the remainder;











3.



Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 133, 5.5.2012 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-9/12 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Case T-74/18: Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Visi/one v EUIPO — EasyFix (Door hanger for vehicles) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a door hanger for vehicles — Earlier design — Proof of the disclosure — Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Ground for invalidity — Lack of individual character — Informed user — Degree of freedom of the designer — No different overall impression — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, traffic signs








C_2019263EN.01004201.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/42






Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Visi/one v EUIPO — EasyFix (Door hanger for vehicles)
(Case T-74/18) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a door hanger for vehicles - Earlier design - Proof of the disclosure - Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - No different overall impression - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)
(2019/C 263/47)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Visi/one GmbH (Remscheid, Germany) (represented by: H. Bourree and M. Bartz, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: EasyFix GmbH (Vienna, Austria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2017 (Case R 1424/2016-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between EasyFix and Visi/one.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Visi/one GmbH and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear their own costs.







(1)  OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.
Case C-562/18: Order of the President of the Court of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d'instance de Sens — France) — X
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European election, discrimination based on disability, equal treatment, guardianship, mentally disabled person, right to vote








C_2019288EN.01003803.xml










26.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/38






Order of the President of the Court of 13 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d'instance de Sens — France) — X
(Case C-562/18) (1)

(2019/C 288/48)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 408, 12.11.2018.
Information to be provided pursuant to Article 5(2) — Establishment of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) (Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19))
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: The Member States
Subjects: Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, cross-border cooperation, economic and social cohesion, economic cooperation, local authority, regional authority, regional cooperation, regional development








C_2019197EN.01002301.xml










13.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 197/23






Information to be provided pursuant to Article 5(2)
Establishment of a European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC)

(Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19))

(2019/C 197/05)
I.1)   Name, address and contact point


Registered name: EVTZ Euregio Maas-Rhein

Registered office: Gospertstraße 42, 4700 Eupen, Belgium
Contact point: Michael Dejozé, +32 87789630, info@euregio-mr.eu

Internet address of the Grouping: www.euregio-mr.eu
I.2)   Duration of the Grouping


Duration of the Grouping: Unlimited

Date of registration: 15.3.2019
Date of publication: 19.3.2019II.   OBJECTIVES









(1)


The core remit of EGTC Euregio Maas-Rhein is to facilitate and intensify cooperation between the partner regions in order to promote balanced and sustainable development in the region and make daily life for all inhabitants easier regardless of their circumstances.
EGTC Euregio Maas-Rhein aims to be a platform for pooling competences, i.e. to be a facilitator for the development of territorial cohesion, without however claiming to replace the existing competent authorities.












(2)


EGTC Euregio Maas-Rhein can develop activities, draw up and implement programmes and projects and apply for funding.




III.   ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON NAME OF THE GROUPING


Name in English: EGTC Euregio Maas-Rhein

Name in French: GECT Euregio Maas-Rhein
IV.   MEMBERS

IV.1)   Total number of members in the Grouping: 5
IV.2)   Nationalities of the members of the Grouping: Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany
IV.3)   Member information (1)


Official name: Province of Limburg

Postal address: Universiteitslaan 1, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium
Internet address: http://www.limburg.be/

Type of member: Regional authority

Official name: Province of Liège

Postal address: Palais Provincial, 18a Place Saint-Lambert, 4000 Liège, Belgium
Internet address: https://www.provincedeliege.be/

Type of member: Regional authority

Official name: German-speaking Community of Belgium

Postal address: Klötzerbahn 32 32, 4700 Eupen, Belgium
Internet address: http://www.ostbelgienlive.be

Type of member: Regional authority

Official name: Region Aachen-Zweckverband

Postal address: Dennenwartstraße 25-27, 52068 Aachen, Germany
Internet address: www.regionaachen.de

Type of member: Regional authority

Official name: Province of Limburg

Postal address: Limburglaan 10, 6229 GA Maastricht, Netherlands
Internet address: https://www.limburg.nl/

Type of member: Regional authority


(1)  Please add for each member.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9323 — RheinEnergie/SPIE/TankE) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-06-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: communications industry, economic concentration, electrical engineering, energy supply, information service, mechanical engineering, merger control, provision of services, water supply








C_2019209EN.01003101.xml










20.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 209/31






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9323 — RheinEnergie/SPIE/TankE)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 209/02)
On 13 June 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in German language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9323. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.