do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-469/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 19 June 2019 — All in One Star Ltd
Date: 2019-06-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: branch, company law, disclosure of information, managing director, nationality of legal persons, private limited company, registration of a company, share capital








C_2019328EN.01001501.xml










30.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 328/15






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 19 June 2019 — All in One Star Ltd
(Case C-469/19)
(2019/C 328/16)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant: All in One Star Ltd

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 30 of Directive (EU) 2017/1132 (1) preclude a national provision under which the indication of the amount of share capital or a comparable capital value is required for a branch of a limited liability company with registered office in another Member State to be entered in the commercial register?










2.








(a)


Does Article 30 of Directive (EU) 2017/1132 preclude a national provision under which, when applying for a branch of a limited liability company with registered office in another Member State to be entered in the commercial register, the managing director of the company has to provide an assurance that there is no barrier to his personal appointment under national law in the form of a prohibition, ordered by a court or public authority, on practising his profession or trade, corresponding in whole or in part with the object of the company, or in the form of a final conviction for certain criminal offences and that, in this respect, he has been instructed of his unrestricted duty to provide information to the court by a notary, a representative of a comparable legal advisory profession or a consular officer?










(b)


If Question 2(a) is answered in the negative:






 


Do Articles 49 and 54 TFEU preclude a national provision under which the managing director of the company has to provide such an assurance when applying for a branch of a limited liability company with registered office in another Member State to be entered in the commercial register?














(1)  Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (OJ 2017 L 169, p. 46).
Case T-213/18: Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — Brita v EUIPO (Shape of a faucet) (EU trade mark — Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark — Shape of a faucet — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-06-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, automatic vending machine, beverage industry, household article, maintenance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, water treatment








C_2019288EN.01004702.xml










26.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/47






Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — Brita v EUIPO (Shape of a faucet)
(Case T-213/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a faucet - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 288/60)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Brita GmbH (Taunusstein, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2018 (Case R 1864/2017-4), relating to an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a faucet as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Brita GmbH to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 166, 14.5.2018.
Case C-660/17 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2019 — RF v Commission (Appeal — Action for annulment — Application submitted by fax — Original of the application lodged out of time with the Registry of the General Court — Delay in the delivery of mail — Definition of ‘force majeure or unforeseeable circumstances’)
Date: 2019-06-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: General Court (EU), appeal to the Court (EU), facsimile, limitation of legal proceedings, postal service








C_2019270EN.01000701.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/7






Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2019 — RF v Commission
(Case C-660/17 P) (1)

(Appeal - Action for annulment - Application submitted by fax - Original of the application lodged out of time with the Registry of the General Court - Delay in the delivery of mail - Definition of ‘force majeure or unforeseeable circumstances’)
(2019/C 270/07)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Appellant: RF (represented by: K. Komar-Komarowski, radca prawny)

Other party: European Commission (represented by: J. Szczodrowski, G. Meessen and I. Rogalski, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Rejects the request for admission of new evidence;










2.


Dismisses the appeal;










3.


Orders RF to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 190, 4.6.2018.
Case T-370/19: Action brought on 19 June 2019 — Spain v Commission
Date: 2019-06-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, Internet, Kosovo, information technology, market supervision, operation of the Institutions, regulation of telecommunications, trans-European network, transmission network








C_2019263EN.01006701.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/67






Action brought on 19 June 2019 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-370/19)
(2019/C 263/72)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the European Commission of 18 March 2019.










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action is brought against the Commission Decision of 18 March 2019 on the participation of the National Regulatory Authority of Kosovo in the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications. (1)

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






1.


First plea, alleging infringement of Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1971 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) and the Agency for Support for BEREC (BEREC Office), amending Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009, (2) in so far as that article permits only the Board of Regulators, the working groups and the Management Board to be open to the participation of regulatory authorities of third countries.










2.


Second plea, alleging infringement of Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1971, in so far as there is no agreement as to the Regulatory Authority of Kosovo’s participation in BEREC.










3.


Third plea, alleging infringement of Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1971, in so far as the European Commission has deviated from the established procedure for participation of the regulatory authorities of third countries in BEREC. This also led to the adoption of a legal act with no legal basis whatsoever and created legal obligations in respect of third parties, without specific powers having been conferred to that effect.






(1)  OJ 2019 C 115, p. 26.

(2)  OJ 2018 L 321, p. 1.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9315 — Chr. Hansen/Lonza/JV) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-06-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bio-industry, economic concentration, merger control, pharmaceutical industry, provision of services








C_2019208EN.01000601.xml










19.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 208/6






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9315 — Chr. Hansen/Lonza/JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 208/05)

1.   
On 11 June 2019, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Chr. Hansen Holding A/S (‘Chr. Hansen’, Denmark),










—


Lonza Ltd (‘Lonza’, Switzerland), controlled by Lonza Group Ltd,










—


A newly created joint venture (the ‘JV’, Switzerland).




Chr. Hansen and Lonza acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation, joint control over the JV.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Chr. Hansen: the development of natural solutions for the food, nutritional, pharmaceutical and agricultural industries,
—   for Lonza: the provision of various services from research to final product manufacturing in the pharmaceutical, healthcare and life science industries, including contract development and manufacturing services (‘CDMO’) and services related to drug formulation services and drug delivery technologies,
—   for the JV: the supply of CDMO services to pharmaceutical companies in relation to live biotherapeutic products and phages.


3.   

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.



4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.9315 — Chr. Hansen/Lonza/JV
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu




Fax +32 22964301




Postal address:




European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-479/18: Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — Multifit v EUIPO (Premiere) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark Premiere — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-06-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, animal feedingstuffs, business management, dietary product, pet food, registered trade mark, retail trade, toy library, trade-mark law








C_2019288EN.01005102.xml










26.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/51






Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — Multifit v EUIPO (Premiere)
(Case T-479/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Premiere - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 288/65)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Multifit Tiernahrungs GmbH (Krefeld, Germany) (represented by: N. Weber and L. Thiel, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action seeking annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 May 2018 (Case R 2365/2017-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Premiere as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Multifit Tiernahrungs GmbH to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 341, 24.9.2018.