do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
New national side of euro coins intended for circulation2019/C 351/08
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Germany, commemoration, euro, issuing of currency








C_2019351EN.01001101.xml










17.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/11






New national side of euro coins intended for circulation
(2019/C 351/08)




National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Germany

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Germany

Subject of commemoration: The 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall

Description of the design: Thirty years ago, the Berlin Wall fell. Beyond the impact on German society, it was an event with global consequences. On 9 November 1989, this occasion marks the end of the cold war and announces an appeasement after several decades of international tensions. At the European level, it is the first step towards the reunification of one of the leading countries of the European Union. This major change was after materialised by the Moscow Treaty of which France was a signatory. The European Union welcomed then 16 million new citizens in just one year; almost the structural and economic effect of welcoming a new country!
The design represents the Berlin Wall, opened in its centre, letting the doves (allegories of the international appeasement), and the jubilant crowd pass. In the background, the Brandenburg Gate, Berlin’s symbol par excellence, is represented. The mention ‘30 Jahre Mauerfall’ (30 years of the fall of the Berlin Wall) is inscribed on one side of the wall. At the bottom of the design is the year of issuance ‘2019’ and at its right the indication of the issuing country ‘D’.
The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued: 30 000 000

Date of issue: September/October 2019


(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).
Case C-762/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rīgas apgabaltiesas Civillietu tiesu kolēģija (Latvia) lodged on 17 October 2019 — SIA ‘CV-Online Latvia’ v SIA ‘Melons’
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet site, database, database management system, hypertext, intellectual property, search engine








C_2019423EN.01003001.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/30






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rīgas apgabaltiesas Civillietu tiesu kolēģija (Latvia) lodged on 17 October 2019 — SIA ‘CV-Online Latvia’ v SIA ‘Melons’
(Case C-762/19)
(2019/C 423/37)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Rīgas apgabaltiesas Civillietu tiesu kolēģija

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant at first instance and respondent: SIA ‘CV-Online Latvia’

Defendant at first instance and appellant: SIA ‘Melons’

Questions referred







1.


Should the defendant’s activities, which consist in using a hyperlink to redirect end users to the applicant’s website, where they can consult a database of job advertisements, be interpreted as falling within the definition of ‘re-utilisation’ in Article 7(2)(b) of the Directive of 11 March 1996 (1) on the legal protection of databases, more specifically, as the re-utilisation of the database by another form of transmission?










2.


Should the information containing the meta tags that is shown in the defendant’s search engine be interpreted as falling within the definition of ‘extraction’ in Article 7(2)(a) of the Directive of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, more specifically, as the permanent or temporary transfer of all or a substantial part of the contents of a database to another medium by any means or in any form?






(1)  Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases (OJ 1996 L 77, p. 20).
Case T-279/18: Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2019 — Alliance Pharmaceuticals v EUIPO — AxiCorp (AXICORP ALLIANCE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark AXICORP ALLIANCE — Earlier EU word and figurative marks ALLIANCE — Relative grounds for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Proof of genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Interpretation of the description of the goods reproduced in the alphabetical list accompanying the Nice Classification)
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019432EN.01004001.xml










23.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/40






Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2019 — Alliance Pharmaceuticals v EUIPO — AxiCorp (AXICORP ALLIANCE)
(Case T-279/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark AXICORP ALLIANCE - Earlier EU word and figurative marks ALLIANCE - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use of the earlier marks - Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Interpretation of the description of the goods reproduced in the alphabetical list accompanying the Nice Classification)
(2019/C 432/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Alliance Pharmaceuticals Ltd (Chippenham, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: AxiCorp GmbH (Friedrichsdorf, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2018 (Case R 1473/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Alliance Pharmaceuticals and AxiCorp.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 February 2018 (Case R 1473/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Alliance Pharmaceuticals Ltd and AxiCorp GmbH, in so far as the Board of Appeal dismissed the appeal brought before it as regards the grounds for opposition set out in Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation 2017/1001;











2.



Dismisses the action as to the remainder;











3.



Orders EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Alliance Pharmaceuticals for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.







(1)  OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Case C-579/18: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Liège — Belgium) — Ministère public, Ministre des Finances du Royaume de Belgique v QC, Comida paralela 12. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Excise duties — Directive 2008/118/EC — Articles 8 and 38 — Person liable to pay excise duty following the unlawful introduction of goods into the territory of a Member State — Concept — Company civilly liable for acts committed by its manager)
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil liability, customs debt, customs territory (EU), excise duty, import (EU), manager, taxpayer








C_2019423EN.01001602.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/16






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d'appel de Liège — Belgium) — Ministère public, Ministre des Finances du Royaume de Belgique v QC, Comida paralela 12.
(Case C-579/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Excise duties - Directive 2008/118/EC - Articles 8 and 38 - Person liable to pay excise duty following the unlawful introduction of goods into the territory of a Member State - Concept - Company civilly liable for acts committed by its manager)
(2019/C 423/20)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour d'appel de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Ministère public, Ministre des Finances du Royaume de Belgique

Defendants: QC, Comida paralela 12

Operative part of the judgment

Article 38 of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC, read in conjunction with Article 8(2) of that directive, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, in the event of the unlawful introduction into the territory of a Member State of excise goods released for consumption in another Member State, makes a legal entity which is civilly liable for the criminal offences committed by its manager jointly and severally liable for the excise duties.


(1)  OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Case T-628/18: Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2019 — E.I. Papadopoulos v EUIPO — Europastry (fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre — Earlier EU figurative mark Caprice — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal product, confectionery, confectionery product, frozen product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019432EN.01005001.xml










23.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/50






Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2019 — E.I. Papadopoulos v EUIPO — Europastry (fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre)
(Case T-628/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre - Earlier EU figurative mark Caprice - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2019/C 432/58)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos SA (Moschato-Tavros, Greece) (represented by: C. Chrysanthis, P.V. Chardalia and A. Vasilogamvrou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Lapinskaite, S. Palmero Cabezas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Europastry, SA (Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain) (represented by: L. Estropá Navarro, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 August 2018 (Case R 493/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos and Europastry.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos SA to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 455, 17.12.2018.
Euro exchange ratesSource: reference exchange rate published by the ECB. 16 October 20192019/C 351/07
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019351EN.01001001.xml










17.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/10






Euro exchange rates (1)

16 October 2019
(2019/C 351/07)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1025 




JPY


Japanese yen


119,90 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4712 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86560 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,8358 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0997 




ISK


Iceland króna


138,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1465 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,758 




HUF


Hungarian forint


333,02 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2955 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7561 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,5076 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6394 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4563 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6500 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7653 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5138 




KRW


South Korean won


1 310,51 




ZAR


South African rand


16,5129 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8270 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4338 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 662,11 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6250 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,845 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,8212 




THB


Thai baht


33,533 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,6024 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,2053 




INR


Indian rupee


78,7680 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-767/19: Action brought on 17 October 2019 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: electrical energy, electricity supply, energy distribution, energy grid, energy industry, energy market, gas supply, infringement procedure (EU), market access, national implementing measure








C_2020010EN.01002401.xml










13.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 10/24






Action brought on 17 October 2019 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium
(Case C-767/19)
(2020/C 10/33)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by O. Beynet and Y. G. Marinova, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court of Justice should:






—


declare that, by failing correctly to transpose:






—


Article 9(1)(a) of Directives 2009/72/EC and 2009/73/EC,










—


Article 37(4)(a) and (b) of Directive 2009/72/EC and Article 41(4)(a) and (b) of Directive 2009/73/EC,










—


Article 37(6)(a), (b) and (c) and (9) of 2009/72/EC and Article 41(6)(a), (b) and (c) and (9) of Directive 2009/73/EC, and










—


Article 37(10) of 2009/72/EC and Article 41(10) of Directive 2007/73/EC,










—


the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 2003/54/EC, (1) and under Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing Directive 2003/55/EC; (2)















—


order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is brought against the defective transposition in Belgium of Directives 2009/72 and 2009/73, concerning the common rules for the internal market in electricity and natural gas, respectively. Those directives contain, inter alia, provisions relating to the effective separation between the operation of electricity and gas transmission networks from supply and generation activities in order to prevent the risk of discrimination in the operation of the network. They also provide for the establishment of independent national regulatory authorities in order to achieve the objectives set by those directives.
The Commission takes the view that the transposition of the directives has been carried out insufficiently by the Kingdom of Belgium in two respects, namely the establishment of full ownership unbundling and the provisions concerning the powers and independence of the national regulatory authority.


(1)  OJ 2009 L 211, p. 55.

(2)  OJ 2009 L 211, p. 94.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9575 — Renault/Mobivia/Exadis) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 362/01
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry, vehicle parts








C_2019362EN.01000101.xml










28.10.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 362/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9575 — Renault/Mobivia/Exadis)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 362/01)
On 17 October 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 French 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 32019M9575. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-692/17: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — Paulo Nascimento Consulting — Mediação Imobiliária Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Exemptions — Article 135(1)(b) and (d) — Transactions relating to the granting, negotiation and management of credit — Transactions concerning debts, with the exception of the recovery of debt — Assignment for consideration, to a third party, of a position held in enforcement proceedings for recovery of a debt recognised by a judgment)
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, debt, enforcement of ruling, mortgage, provision of services, real estate credit, tax exemption








C_2019423EN.01000301.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/3






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — Paulo Nascimento Consulting — Mediação Imobiliária Lda v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-692/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Exemptions - Article 135(1)(b) and (d) - Transactions relating to the granting, negotiation and management of credit - Transactions concerning debts, with the exception of the recovery of debt - Assignment for consideration, to a third party, of a position held in enforcement proceedings for recovery of a debt recognised by a judgment)
(2019/C 423/03)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Paulo Nascimento Consulting — Mediação Imobiliária Lda

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Article 135(1)(b) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption laid down by it in respect of transactions concerning the granting, negotiation or management of credit does not apply to a transaction which, for the taxable person, consists in assigning, to a third party, for consideration all the rights and obligations deriving from the taxable person’s position in enforcement proceedings for recovery of a debt recognised by a judgment, a debt the payment of which was secured by a right over immovable property awarded to that taxable person and made the subject of attachment.


(1)  OJ C 94, 12.3.2018.
Case C-403/18 P: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 — Alcogroup SA, Alcodis SA v European Commission, Orde van Vlaamse Balies, Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone, Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Ethanol market — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Article 20(4) — Inspection decision — Conduct of the inspection — Legal professional privilege — Refusal to suspend measures of investigation — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Preparatory decision)
Date: 2019-10-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: admissibility, cartel, competition policy, control of restrictive practices, ethanol, restriction on competition, sanction (EU)








C_2019423EN.01001002.xml










16.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 423/10






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 — Alcogroup SA, Alcodis SA v European Commission, Orde van Vlaamse Balies, Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone, Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles
(Case C-403/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Ethanol market - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Article 20(4) - Inspection decision - Conduct of the inspection - Legal professional privilege - Refusal to suspend measures of investigation - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Preparatory decision)
(2019/C 423/12)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellants: Alcogroup SA, Alcodis SA (represented by P. de Bandt, J. Dewispelaere and J. Probst, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. Christoforou, V. Bottka, C. Giolito and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents), Orde van Vlaamse Balies (represented by: F. Wijckmans and S. De Keer, advocaten, and by S. Engelen, avocat), Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone, Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and P. Goffinet, avocats)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal.










2.


Orders Alcogroup SA and Alcodis SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.