do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-378/19: Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, printer, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019270EN.01004001.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/40






Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL)
(Case T-378/19)
(2019/C 270/42)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Topcart GmbH (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Carl International (Limonest, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark TC CARL — Application No 15 048 556

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2019 in Case R 1617/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(a), in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-379/19: Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation v EUIPO (Serviceplan)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer assisted design, marketing, miscellaneous industries, publishing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019270EN.01004101.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/41






Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation v EUIPO (Serviceplan)
(Case T-379/19)
(2019/C 270/43)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation GmbH & Co KG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: B. Koch and P. Schmitz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark Serviceplan — Application No 15 234 669

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2019 in Case R 1424/2018-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as it dismisses the appeal;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-377/19: Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, maintenance, printer, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019270EN.01003902.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/39






Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Topcart v EUIPO — Carl International (TC CARL)
(Case T-377/19)
(2019/C 270/41)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Topcart GmbH (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Carl International (Limonest, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark TC CARL — Application No 14 957 542

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2019 in Case R 1826/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(a), in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Apulia, Italy, State aid, control of State aid








C_2019211EN.01000601.xml










21.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 211/6






Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty)
(2019/C 211/02)







Date of adoption of the decision


13.05.2019




Aid number


SA.52088 (2018/N)




Member State


Italy




Region


PUGLIA


—




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Misura 16 Cooperazione — “Sottomisura 16.2: sostegno a progetti pilota ed allo sviluppo di nuovi prodotti, pratiche, processi e tecnologie”.




Legal basis


Programma di Sviluppo Rurale (PSR) 2014-2020 della Regione Puglia approvato dalla Commissione Europea con Decisione C(2015) 8412 del 24.11.2015, ratificata con deliberazione della Giunta regionale della Puglia n.2424 del 30.12.2015, e successive modifiche. Determinazione dell’Autorità di Gestione n. 222 del 12/10/2018




Type of measure


Scheme


—




Objective


Aid for co-operation in forestry sector, Aid for co-operation in rural areas




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: EUR 25 (in millions)




Intensity


100  %




Duration (period)


until 31.12.2023




Economic sectors


Forestry and logging, Manufacture of food products




Name and address of the granting authority


Gianluca Nardone
LUNGOMARE NAZARIO SAURO, 45/47 — 70121 BARI




Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm.
Case T-381/19: Action brought on 21 June 2019 — adp Gauselmann v EUIPO — Gameloft (City Mania)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic game, recording medium, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019270EN.01004301.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/43






Action brought on 21 June 2019 — adp Gauselmann v EUIPO — Gameloft (City Mania)
(Case T-381/19)
(2019/C 270/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Lübbecke, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gameloft SE (Paris, France)

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 City Mania — Application for registration No 15 936 339

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 April 2019 in Case R 976/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the ground of appeal to be founded and annul the contested decision, declare the existence of likelihood of confusion between the trade marks in dispute, and accordingly, order the complete rejection of the requested trade mark;










—


order EUIPO and the opposing party, should it appear in the proceedings before the General Court, to bear the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Commission information notice pursuant to Article 17(5) 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 — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Finland, air transport, intra-EU transport, invitation to tender, services of general interest, transport regulations, Åland








C_2019210EN.01001801.xml










21.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 210/18






Commission information notice pursuant to Article 17(5) 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
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 210/09)






Member State


Finland




Route concerned


Mariehamn (MHQ) — Stockholm Arlanda (ARN)




Period of validity of the contract


1.3.2020-29.2.2024




Deadline for submission of applications and tenders


15.9.2019
https://www.e-avrop.com/portaler/Alandsportalen/Default.aspx




Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained free of charge.


Further information:
ÅLANDS LANDSKAPSREGERING
Address:





P.O.B. 1060




AX-22111 MARIEHAMN




Åland, FINLAND




Tel. +358 1825000




Email: registrator@regeringen.ax




Internet:




https://www.e-avrop.com/portaler/Alandsportalen/Default.aspx
Case T-380/19: Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation v EUIPO (Serviceplan Solutions)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, miscellaneous industries, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019270EN.01004201.xml










12.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 270/42






Action brought on 21 June 2019 — Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation v EUIPO (Serviceplan Solutions)
(Case T-380/19)
(2019/C 270/44)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Serviceplan Gruppe für innovative Kommunikation GmbH & Co KG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: B. Koch and P. Schmitz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark Serviceplan Solutions — Application No 15 244 742

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2019 in Case R 1427/2018-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as it dismisses the appeal;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9385 — Orange/SecureLink) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, information security, merger control, provision of services, telecommunications








C_2019219EN.01000101.xml










1.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 219/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9385 — Orange/SecureLink)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 219/01)
On 21 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 32019M9385. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019210EN.01001201.xml










21.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 210/12






Euro exchange rates (1)

20 June 2019
(2019/C 210/06)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1307 




JPY


Japanese yen


121,71 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4661 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89155 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6348 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1142 




ISK


Iceland króna


141,50 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,6678 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,619 




HUF


Hungarian forint


323,58 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2556 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7262 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,5291 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6323 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4886 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8379 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7158 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5336 




KRW


South Korean won


1 312,25 




ZAR


South African rand


16,1309 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7502 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4035 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 036,15 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6901 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,159 




RUB


Russian rouble


71,4393 




THB


Thai baht


34,978 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,3407 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,3960 




INR


Indian rupee


78,5065 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-615/17: Order of the General Court of 21 June 2019 — Ardigo and UO v Commission
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, transfer of pension rights








C_2019295EN.01008901.xml










2.9.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 295/89






Order of the General Court of 21 June 2019 — Ardigo and UO v Commission
(Case T-615/17) (1)

(2019/C 295/114)
Language of the case: French
The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 382, 13.11.2017.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9227 — Rockwell/Schlumberger/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: automation, economic concentration, extraction of oil, merger control, natural gas, project management








C_2019210EN.01002101.xml










21.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 210/21






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9227 — Rockwell/Schlumberger/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 210/11)

1.   

On 17 June 2019, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the companies Rockwell Automation, Inc. (‘Rockwell’, United States) and Schlumberger Limited (‘Schlumberger’, United States) acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation, joint control over a newly-created company constituting a joint venture (‘JV’) by way of purchase of shares and contribution of assets and associated personnel.



2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


Rockwell is a global company dedicated to industrial automation and control solutions,










—


Schlumberger is a global supplier of technology, integrated project management and information solutions to customers in the oil and gas industry,










—


The JV will be active in the provision of fully integrated and digitally enabled surface automation and control solutions to customers in the global oil and gas industry.






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.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


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.9227 — Rockwell/Schlumberger/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’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case C-481/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte costituzionale (Italy) lodged on 21 June 2019 — DB v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative procedure, administrative sanction, evidence, impunity, insider trading, liability, penalty, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2019357EN.01001001.xml










21.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/10






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte costituzionale (Italy) lodged on 21 June 2019 — DB v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)
(Case C-481/19)
(2019/C 357/14)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte costituzionale

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: DB

Respondent on a point of law: Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)

Questions referred







1.


Are Article 14(3) of Directive 2003/6/EC, (1) in so far as it continues to apply ratione temporis, and Article 30(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 (2) to be interpreted as permitting Member States to refrain from penalising individuals who refuse to answer questions put to them by the competent authorities and which might establish their liability for an offence that is punishable by administrative sanctions of a ‘punitive’ nature?










2.


If the answer to the first question is in the negative, are Article 14(3) of Directive 2003/6/EC, in so far as it continues to apply ratione temporis, and Article 30(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 compatible with Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — including in the light of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on Article 6 ECHR and the constitutional traditions common to the Member States — in so far as they require sanctions to be applied even to individuals who refuse to answer questions put to them by the competent authorities and which might establish their liability for an offence that is punishable by administrative sanctions of a ‘punitive’ nature?






(1)  Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on insider dealing and market manipulation (market abuse) (OJ 2003 L 96, p. 16).

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on market abuse (market abuse regulation) and repealing Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directives 2003/124/EC, 2003/125/EC and 2004/72/EC (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 1).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9234 — Harris Corporation/L3 Technologies) (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 48/03
Date: 2019-06-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: advanced technology industry, aeronautical industry, arms industry, economic concentration, electronics industry, merger control, telecommunications








C_2021048EN.01000301.xml










11.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 48/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9234 — Harris Corporation/L3 Technologies)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 48/03)
On 21 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) in conjunction with Article 6(2) 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 32019M9234. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.