do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-853/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Poprad (Slovakia) lodged on 22 November 2019 — IM v Sting Reality s.r.o.
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer protection, personal data, real property, restriction on competition, transfer of property, unfair terms of contract








C_2020036EN.01001802.xml










3.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 36/18






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Poprad (Slovakia) lodged on 22 November 2019 — IM v Sting Reality s.r.o.
(Case C-853/19)
(2020/C 36/23)
Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Okresný súd Poprad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: IM

Defendant: Sting Reality s.r.o.

Questions referred







1.


Must Directive 2005/29/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council be interpreted to the effect that factual circumstances, such as those in the present case, in which a natural person who finds himself in financial difficulties and under time pressure and whose intention is to obtain credit for retaining his ownership of immovable property, which constitutes his sole residence, is presented with a contract by a business providing credit which permanently deprives him of ownership of immovable property, even when the wish of that person was to transfer immovable property to the creditor only temporarily for the purposes of securing a credit contract, constitute an unfair commercial practice?










2.


Is Council Directive 93/13/EEC (2) of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (‘Directive 93/13’) to be interpreted to the effect that, in the factual circumstances described in question 1, a sales contract on the transfer of immovable property is subject to review by the court despite the credit business’s argument concerning individually negotiated contractual terms if the business refuses to present to the court contracts in other cases for the purposes of ascertaining whether they are pre-formulated standard contracts used by the business in other cases?










3.


If the case is covered under Directive 93/13, is the situation prior to the conclusion of the contract also to be considered a relevant circumstance for the purposes of Article 4(1) of that Directive in such circumstances where the defendant business obtained personal data of the applicant without the applicant’s agreement?






(1)  OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22.

(2)  OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.
Case C-111/19: Order of the President of the Court of 22 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Industria Italiana Autobus SpA v Comune di Palermo, interested party: Irisbus Italia SpA
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, freedom of movement, freedom to provide services, occupational safety, principle of legal certainty, public procurement, right of establishment, tendering, wage cost








C_2020137EN.01004401.xml










27.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/44






Order of the President of the Court of 22 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Industria Italiana Autobus SpA v Comune di Palermo, interested party: Irisbus Italia SpA
(Case C-111/19) (1)

(2020/C 137/65)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.
Case C-110/19: Order of the President of the Court of 22 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Raggio di Sole Società Cooperativa Onlus v Comune di Ostuni, Consorzio per L'Inclusione Sociale dell'Ats Fasano — Ostuni — Cisternino, interested party: La Scintilla Soc. Coop. Soc.
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, freedom of movement, freedom to provide services, occupational safety, principle of legal certainty, public procurement, right of establishment, tendering, wage cost








C_2020137EN.01004304.xml










27.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/43






Order of the President of the Court of 22 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Raggio di Sole Società Cooperativa Onlus v Comune di Ostuni, Consorzio per L'Inclusione Sociale dell'Ats Fasano — Ostuni — Cisternino, interested party: La Scintilla Soc. Coop. Soc.
(Case C-110/19) (1)

(2020/C 137/64)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.
Case C-109/19: Order of the President of the Court of 22 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Raggio di Sole Società Cooperativa Onlus v Comune di Cisternino, Consorzio per L'Inclusione Sociale dell'Ats Fasano — Ostuni — Cisternino, interested party: La Scintilla Soc. Coop. Soc.
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, freedom of movement, freedom to provide services, occupational safety, principle of legal certainty, public procurement, right of establishment, tendering, wage cost








C_2020137EN.01004303.xml










27.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/43






Order of the President of the Court of 22 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Raggio di Sole Società Cooperativa Onlus v Comune di Cisternino, Consorzio per L'Inclusione Sociale dell'Ats Fasano — Ostuni — Cisternino, interested party: La Scintilla Soc. Coop. Soc.
(Case C-109/19) (1)

(2020/C 137/63)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.
Case T-814/19: Action brought on 22 November 2019 – Nutravita v EUIPO – Pegaso (nutravita Healthy Mind, Body & Soul.)
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2020027EN.01006701.xml










27.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 27/67






Action brought on 22 November 2019 – Nutravita v EUIPO – Pegaso (nutravita Healthy Mind, Body & Soul.)
(Case T-814/19)
(2020/C 27/67)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nutravita Ltd (Maidenhead, United Kingdom) (represented by: H. Dhondt and J. Cassiman, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pegaso Srl (Negrar, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark nutravita Healthy Mind, Body & Soul. of colours light green and black – Application for registration No 16 255 804

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 September 2019 in Case R 80/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 47(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 10(3) of the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;










—


Infringement of Article 71(1)(b) of the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;










—


Infringement of Article 71(1) of Regulation of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; and










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9590 — Oaktree/RAFI) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 395/08
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronics industry, investment company, merger control, provision of services, trade credit








C_2019395EN.01001001.xml










22.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/10






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9590 — Oaktree/RAFI)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 395/08)

1.   
On 15 November 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:






—


Oaktree Capital Group, LLC (‘Oaktree’, United States),










—


RAFI GmbH & Co. KG (‘RAFI’, Germany).




Oaktree acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of RAFI.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Oaktree: investment management company focused on corporate credit, private equity, real assets and listed equity. Oaktree’s investments relate to various industries such as production, health care, textile, travel, mining and media. Oaktree is jointly controlled by Oaktree Capital Group Holdings, L.P. and Brookfield Asset Management Inc.,










—


for RAFI: developer and manufacturer of electronic components and human-machine interface solutions as well as provider of electronic manufacturing services.






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.9590 — Oaktree/RAFI
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.
Euro exchange ratesSource: reference exchange rate published by the ECB. 21 November 20192019/C 395/03
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2019395EN.01000401.xml










22.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/4






Euro exchange rates (1)

21 November 2019
(2019/C 395/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1091 




JPY


Japanese yen


120,46 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4732 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85548 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6568 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0998 




ISK


Iceland króna


136,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,1018 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,520 




HUF


Hungarian forint


333,75 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2970 




RON


Romanian leu


4,7813 




TRY


Turkish lira


6,3097 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6282 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4759 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6739 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7239 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5098 




KRW


South Korean won


1 303,11 




ZAR


South African rand


16,2645 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7933 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4395 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 624,45 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6244 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,419 




RUB


Russian rouble


70,6406 




THB


Thai baht


33,500 




BRL


Brazilian real


4,6453 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,5649 




INR


Indian rupee


79,5675 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-672/18: Order of the General Court of 22 November 2019 — Pyke v EUIPO — Paglieri (CLIOMAKEUP) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, auction sale, cosmetic product, electronic commerce, paper, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2020027EN.01003401.xml










27.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 27/34






Order of the General Court of 22 November 2019 — Pyke v EUIPO — Paglieri (CLIOMAKEUP)
(Case T-672/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)
(2020/C 27/42)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Pyke Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, F. Rossi, N. Parrotta and R. Perotti, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Paglieri SpA (Alessandria, Italy) (represented by: A. Perani and G. Ghisletti, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 August 2018 (Case 2675/2017-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Paglieri and Pyke.

Operative part







1)



There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.











2)



Pyke Srl and Paglieri SpA shall bear their own costs, and each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).







(1)  OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9505 — Daimler AG/Swiss Re Ltd/JV) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 395/06
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, insurance company, merger control, motor vehicle industry, reinsurance, subsidiary








C_2019395EN.01000701.xml










22.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/7






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.9505 — Daimler AG/Swiss Re Ltd/JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 395/06)

1.   
On 15 November 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:






—


Daimler Insurance Services GmbH (‘DIS’, Germany), and










—


Swiss Re Life Capital Ltd (‘SRLC’, Switzerland),




DIS and SRLC acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of a newly created 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:






—


DIS is a subsidiary of Daimler AG, which is globally active in the development, manufacturing and distribution of automotive products, mainly passenger cars, trucks, vans and buses,










—


SRLC is a subsidiary of Swiss Re Ltd, which is a wholesale provider of reinsurance, insurance, and other insurance-based forms of risk transfer,










—


the JV is intended to develop, distribute and administer insurance products through the establishment and operation of new digital insurance platform(s).






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.9505 — Daimler AG/Swiss Re Ltd/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.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9512 — EQT/Colony Capital/Zayo) (Text with EEA relevance) 2019/C 412/02
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: digital technology, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, provision of services, telecommunications








C_2019412EN.01001101.xml










9.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 412/11






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9512 — EQT/Colony Capital/Zayo)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 412/02)
On 22 November 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 32019M9512. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-811/19: Action brought on 22 November 2019 — Enoport — Producão de Bebidas v EUIPO — Miguel Torres, SA (CABEÇA DE TOIRO)
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020036EN.01003701.xml










3.2.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 36/37






Action brought on 22 November 2019 — Enoport — Producão de Bebidas v EUIPO — Miguel Torres, SA (CABEÇA DE TOIRO)
(Case T-811/19)
(2020/C 36/44)
Language in which the application was lodged: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Enoport — Producão de Bebidas Lda (Rio Maior, Portugal) (represented by: R. Milhões, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Miguel Torres, SA (Vilafranca del Penedés, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark CABEÇA DE TOIRO — Application for registration No 15 626 286

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 September 2019 in Case R 394/2019-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-809/19: Action brought on 22 November 2019 — Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional v EUIPO (El Clasico)
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, audiovisual production, consultancy, cultural event, education, publishing, registered trade mark, sporting event, trade-mark law








C_2020027EN.01006601.xml










27.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 27/66






Action brought on 22 November 2019 — Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional v EUIPO (El Clasico)
(Case T-809/19)
(2020/C 27/66)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: C. Casas Feu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark El Clasico — Application for registration No 1 379 292

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 October 2019 in Case R 1966/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


give judgment allowing the registration in the European Union of the international mark No 1 379 292 El Clásico (mixed) in Class 41 in the name of La Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Special Report No 18/2019 EU greenhouse gas emissions: Well reported, but better insight needed into future reductions2019/C 395/04
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU environmental policy, air quality, climate change, environmental monitoring, environmental statistics, greenhouse gas, pollution control measures, reduction of gas emissions








C_2019395EN.01000501.xml










22.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/5






Special Report No 18/2019
‘EU greenhouse gas emissions: Well reported, but better insight needed into future reductions’
(2019/C 395/04)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 18/2019 ‘EU greenhouse gas emissions: Well reported, but better insight needed into future reductions’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Special Report No 20/2019 EU information systems supporting border control — a strong tool, but more focus needed on timely and complete data2019/C 395/05
Date: 2019-11-22
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU police cooperation, Schengen Information System, border control, external border of the EU, fight against crime, information system, migration control, terrorism








C_2019395EN.01000601.xml










22.11.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/6






Special Report No 20/2019
‘EU information systems supporting border control — a strong tool, but more focus needed on timely and complete data’
(2019/C 395/05)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 20/2019 ‘EU information systems supporting border control — a strong tool, but more focus needed on timely and complete data’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu