ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/33

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and PT Wilmar Nabati Indonesia v Council

(Case T-139/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia - Definitive anti-dumping duties - Article 2(3) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Normal value - Production costs))

(2016/C 402/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia (Medan, Indonesia) and PT Wilmar Nabati Indonesia (Medan) (represented by: P. Vander Schueren, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Boelaert, and subsequently by H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents, and by R. Bierwagen and C. Hipp, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by J.-F. Brakeland, M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents) and European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by O. Prost and M.-S. Dibling, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFUE for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia (OJ 2013 L 315, p. 2) in so far as the applicants are concerned.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Articles 1 and 2 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, in so far as they concern PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and PT Wilmar Nabati Indonesia;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and PT Wilmar Nabati Indonesia;

3. Orders the European Commission and the European Biodiesel Board (EBB) to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/25

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-548/14) (1)

((Customs Union - Imports of tuna products originating in Ecuador - Post-clearance recovery of import duties - Request for waiver of recovery of import duties - Article 220(2)(b) and Article 236 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Notice to importers published in the Official Journal - Good faith - Application for the remission of import duties - Article 239 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92))

(2017/C 038/33)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, abogado del Estado)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Arenas, A. Caeiros, and B.-R. Killmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Article 2 of Decision C(2014) 3007 final of the Commission of 15 May 2014 finding that the remission of import duties is justified for a certain amount and that remission of import duties is not justified for another amount in a particular case (REM 03/2013).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. annuls Article 2 of Decision C(2014) 3007 final of the Commission of 15 May 2014 finding that the remission of import duties is justified for a certain amount and that remission of import duties is not justified for another amount in a particular case (REM 03/2013);

2. orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 315, 15.9.2014.
Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — August Storck v EUIPO — Chiquita Brands (Fruitfuls)

(Case T-367/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark Fruitfuls - Genuine use - Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 441/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: August Storck KG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: I. Rohr, A.-C. Richter, P. Goldenbaum, T. Melchert and T. Reher, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: represented initially by A. Poch, and subsequently by G. Schneider and D. Gája and finally by D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Chiquita Brands LLC (Charlotte, North Carolina, United States of America) (represented by: L. Bakers, lawyer)

Re:

Action against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2014 (Case R 1580/2013-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Chiquita Brands and August Storck.

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 27 March 2014 (Case R 1580/2013-5) in so far as it confirmed the decision of the Cancellation Division declaring the revocation of the contested mark as regards ‘confectionery’ included in Class 30 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/42

Judgment of the General Court of 16 February 2017 — Holistic Innovation Institute v REA

(Case T-706/14) (1)

((Research and technological development - Projects funded by the European Union in the field of research - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - ZONeSEC and Inachus projects - Decision refusing participation of the applicant - Action for annulment and liability))

(2017/C 104/58)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Holistic Innovation Institute, SLU (Pozuelo de Alarcón, Spain) (represented initially by R. Muñiz García and subsequently by J. Marín López, lawyers)

Defendant: Research Executive Agency (represented by: S. Payan-Lagrou and V. Canetti, acting as Agents, and by J. Rivas, lawyer)

Re:

First, application based on Article 264 TFEU and seeking annulment of the decision of the REA of 24 July 2014 [ARES (2014) 2461172], terminating negotiations and rejecting the participation of the applicant in the European projects Inachus and ZONeSEC and, second, application based on Article 268 TFEU and seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of its exclusion from participation in the said projects and from the communication of certain information concerning the applicant following that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Holistic Innovation Institute, SLU to pay the costs in the present proceedings;

3. Each party shall bear its own costs relating to the interim measures.

(1) OJ C 421, 24.11.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/18

Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2017 — Kendrion v European Union

(Case T-479/14) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Precision in the application - Admissibility - Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Reasonable period within which a judgment must be delivered - Material damage - Interest on the amount of the unpaid fine - Bank guarantee charges - Non-material damage - Causal link))

(2017/C 078/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Kendrion NV (Zeist, Netherlands) (represented by: initially, P. Glazener and T. Ottervanger, and, subsequently, T. Ottervanger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: initially, A. Placco and, subsequently, J. Inghelram and E. Beysen, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Christoforou, S. Noë and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 268 TFEU and seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the duration of the proceedings, before the General Court, in the case that gave rise to the judgment of 16 November 2011, Kendrion v Commission (T-54/06, not published, EU:T:2011:667).

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Orders the European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union, to pay damages of EUR 588 769.18 to Kendrion NV for the material damage suffered by that company as a result of the failure to adjudicate within a reasonable time in the case which gave rise to the judgment of 16 November 2011, Kendrion v Commission (T-54/06, not published, EU:T:2011:667);

2. Orders the European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union, to pay damages of EUR 6 000 to Kendrion for the non-material damage suffered by that company as a result of the failure to adjudicate within a reasonable time in Case T-54/06;

3. Orders that each of the heads of damages referred to in points 1 and 2 above be increased by default interest, to be calculated as from the delivery of the present judgment until payment in full, at the rate set by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its main refinancing operations, increased by three and a half percentage points;

4. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

5. Order the European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union, to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by Kendrion in connection with the plea of inadmissibility which gave rise to the order of 6 January 2015, Kendrion v European Union (T-479/14, not published, EU:T:2015:2);

6. Orders Kendrion, on the one hand, and the European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union, on the other, to bear their own respective costs relating to the action which has given rise to the present judgment;

7. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 277/30

Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2017 — Viraj Profiles v Council

(Case T-67/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of certain stainless steel wires originating in India - Determination of the cost of production - Selling, General and Administrative costs - Obligation to state reasons - Injury - Causal link - Complaint - Opening of the investigation - Manifest error of assessment))

(2017/C 277/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Viraj Profiles Ltd (Maharashtra, India) (represented by: V. Akritidis and Y. Melin, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented: initially by B. Driessen, and subsequently by H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents, assisted by R. Bierwagen, C. Hipp and D. Reich, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1106/2013 of 5 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain stainless steel wires originating in India (OJ 2013 L 298, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1106/2013 of 5 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain stainless steel wires originating in India, as far as it relates to Viraj Profiles Ltd;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Viraj Profiles;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/15

Judgment of the General Court of 14 March 2017 — Hersill v EUIPO — KCI Licensing (VACUP)

(Case T-741/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark VACUP - Earlier EU word marks MINIVAC and V.A.C. - No genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 129/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hersill, SL (Móstoles, Spain) (represented by: M. Aznar Alonso and P. Koch Moreno, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: KCI Licensing, Inc. (San Antonio, Texas, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 August 2014 (Case R 1520/2013-2), relating to opposition proceedings between KCI Licensing and Hersill.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 August 2014 (Case R 1520/2013-2);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Hersill, SL;

3. Orders KCI Licensing, Inc. to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 448, 15.12.2014.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — The Goldman Sachs Group v Commission

(Case T-419/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Imputability of the infringement - Presumption - Error of assessment - Presumption of innocence - Legal certainty - Principle of personal responsibility - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2018/C 328/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: W. Deselaers, J. Koponen and A. Mangiaracina, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Giolito, L. Malferrari, H. van Vliet and J. Norris-Usher, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Prysmian SpA (Milan, Italy) and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl (Milan) (represented by: C. Tesauro, F. Russo and L. Armati, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the [EEA] Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

3. Orders Prysmian SpA and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 5/25

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — USFSPEI v Parliament and Council

(Case T-75/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Time limit for bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility - Non-contractual liability - Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 - Irregularities during the procedure for the adoption of the acts - Failure to consult the Staff Regulations Committee and the staff unions - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals))

(2018/C 005/33)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Union syndicale fédérale de services publics européens et internationaux (USFSPEI) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented initially by: J.-N. Louis and D. de Abreu Caldas and subsequently by: J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: A. Troupiotis and E. Taneva, acting as Agents) and Council of the European Union (represented initially by: M. Bauer and A. Bisch, and subsequently by: M. Bauer and M. Veiga, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendants: European Commission (represented initially by: G. Gattinara and J. Currall, and subsequently by: G. Gattinara and G. Berscheid, acting as Agents)

Re:

Firstly, application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Article 1(27), (32), (46), (61), (64)(b), (65)(b) and (67)(d) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union (OJ 2013 L 287, p. 15) and, secondly, application on the basis of Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the loss which the applicant allegedly suffered following the adoption of Regulation No 1023/2013 in breach of the agreement on the 2004 Reform, of Articles 12 and 27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, of Article 10 of the Staff Regulations and of the consultation procedure provided for in the Council Decision of 23 June 1981.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Union syndicale fédérale de services publics européens et internationaux (USFSPEI) to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 194, 24.6.2014.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Sberbank of Russia v Council

(Case T-732/14) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine - Applicant’s name included and retained in the list of entities to which the restrictive measures apply - Error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Right to property - Right to carry on an economic activity))

(2018/C 392/17)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sberbank of Russia OAO (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: D. Rose QC, M. Lester QC, J.-A. Fearns and P. Crowther, Solicitors)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Boelaert and J.P. Hix, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Gauci, L. Havas and T. Scharf, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision 2014/512/CFSP of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 229, p. 13), as amended by Council Decision 2014/659/CFSP of 8 September 2014 (OJ 2014 L 271, p. 54), by Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/971 of 22 June 2015 (OJ 2015 L 157, p. 50), by Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/2431 of 21 December 2015 (OJ 2015 L 334, p. 22), by Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/1071 of 1 July 2016 (OJ 2016 L 178, p. 21), by Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/2315 of 19 December 2016 (OJ 2016 L 345, p. 65) and by Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1148 of 28 June 2017 (OJ 2017 L 166, p. 35), and, secondly, of Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 of 31 July 2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 229, p. 1), as amended by Council Regulation (EU) No 960/2014 of 8 September 2014 (OJ 2014 L 271, p. 3), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sberbank of Russia OAO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 16, 19.1.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — NKT Verwaltungs and NKT v Commission

(Case T-447/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Evidence of the infringement - Duration of Involvement - Public Distancing - Calculation of the fine - Gravity of the infringement - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2018/C 328/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: NKT Verwaltungs GmbH, formerly nkt cables GmbH (Cologne, Germany) and NKT A/S, formerly NKT Holding A/S (Brøndby, Denmark) (represented by: M. Kofmann and B. Creve, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Giolito, H. van Vliet and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU primarily for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power Cables) in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, an application for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders NKT Verwaltungs GmbH and NKT A/S to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 March 2019 — Tweedale v EFSA

(Case T-716/14) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to toxicity studies conducted in connection with the renewal of the approval of the active substance glyphosate - Partial refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - Overriding public interest - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Concept of information relating to emissions into the environment)

(2019/C 148/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Anthony C. Tweedale (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: B. Kloostra, lawyer)

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (represented by: by D. Detken, J. Tarazona, C. Pintado and B. Vagenende, acting as Agents, assisted initially by R. Van der Hout and A. Köhler, and subsequently by R. Van der Hout and C. Wagner, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented initially by A. Falk, C. Meyer-Seitz, U. Persson, N. Otte Widgren, E. Karlsson and L. Swedenborg, and subsequently by A. Falk, C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Shev, L. Swedenborg and F. Bergius, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for the partial annulment of the EFSA decision of 16 October 2017 annulling and replacing the decision of 30 July 2014 and granting partial access to two toxicity studies on the active substance glyphosate, conducted in connection with the procedure to renew approval of that active substance in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC (OJ 2009 L 309, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of 16 October 2017, annulling and replacing the decision of 30 July 2014 and granting partial access to two toxicity studies on the active substance glyphosate, conducted in connection with the procedure to renew approval of that active substance, in so far as EFSA refuses to disclose the whole of those studies, with the exception of the names and signatures of the persons mentioned therein;

2. Orders EFSA to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr Anthony Tweedale;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 448, 15.12.2014.