ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Pet King Brands v EUIPO — Virbac (SUIMOX)

(Case T-366/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SUIMOX - Earlier EU word mark ZYMOX - Obligation to state reasons - Notification of a decision of the Board of Appeal - Good faith and diligence on the part of the addressee - Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2019/C 288/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pet King Brands, Inc (Bartlett, Illinois, United States) (represented by: T. Schmidpeter and S. Bauer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and H. O’Neill, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Virbac SA (Carros, France) (represented by D.-I. Tayer, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2018 (Case R 1835/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Pet King Brands and Virbac.

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 21 March 2018 (Case R 1835/2017-5) in so far as it concerns ‘veterinary preparations; the aforesaid goods not including ear drops for animals’, ‘veterinary preparations and animal health care products, including antibiotics for animals; the aforesaid goods not including ear drops for animals’ and ‘preparations for destroying vermin; the aforesaid goods not including ear drops for animals’;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 276, 6.8.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 July 2019 — XF v Commission

(Case T-482/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Remuneration - Installation allowance - Temporary change of place of employment - Change of residence)

(2019/C 328/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: XF (represented by J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by T. Bohr and D. Milanowska, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the European Commission’s Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) of 2 October 2017, by which it refused to grant the applicant the benefit of the installation allowance when he moved and took up his appointment at the headquarters of the European External Action Service (EEAS) in Brussels (Belgium).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders XF to bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 364, 8.10.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 June 2019 — Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol v EUIPO (200 PANORAMICZNYCH)

(Joined Cases T-117/18 to T-121/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Applications for the EU word marks 200 PANORAMICZNYCH, 300 PANORAMICZNYCH, 400 PANORAMICZNYCH, 500 PANORAMICZNYCH and 1000 PANORAMICZNYCH - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001 - No misuse of powers)

(2019/C 305/57)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o.o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: C. Rogula, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Re:

Actions brought against five decisions of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 December 2017 (Cases R 2194/2016-5, R 2195/2016-5, R 2200/2016-5, R 2201/2016-5 and R 2208/2016-5), regarding applications for registration of the word signs 200 PANORAMICZNYCH, 300 PANORAMICZNYCH, 400 PANORAMICZNYCH, 500 PANORAMICZNYCH and 1000 PANORAMICZNYCH as EU trade marks.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders Agencja Wydawnicza Technopol sp. z o.o. to pay the costs, including those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 142, 23.4.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 11 September 2019 — YL v Commission

(Case T-545/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2017 promotion procedure - Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 7 with effect from 1 January 2017 - Article 45 of the Staff Regulations - Article 9(3) of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations - Misuse of powers - Disciplinary measure)

(2019/C 399/65)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: YL (represented by: P. Yon and B. de Lapasse, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: L. Radu Bouyon and R. Striani, and subsequently by: L. Radu Bouyon and B. Mongin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU, first, for annulment of the Commission Decision, communicated to the staff of that institution on 13 November 2017, not to promote the applicant to grade AD 7 during the 2017 promotion procedure, second, for promotion of the applicant to grade AD 7 with effect from 1 January 2017 and, third, for compensation for the damage which the applicant allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders YL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2019 — BQ v Court of Justice of the European Union

(Case T-66/18) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Call for tenders of the Court of Justice of the European Union - Freelance translators - Selection procedure - Rejection of a tenderer’s offer - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment)

(2019/C 383/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BQ (represented by: E. Kleani, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: J. Inghelram, Á. Almendros Manzano and V. Hanley-Emilsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 23 November 2017 rejecting the applicant’s tender for the conclusion of a framework contract for the translation of legal texts from German into Greek.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BQ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — Crédit mutuel Arkéa v EUIPO — Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel (Crédit Mutuel)

(Case T-13/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Crédit Mutuel - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Distinctive character acquired through use - Cross-claim - Article 7(1)(b) and (c), and Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 59(1)(a) and Article 59(2) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2019/C 413/53)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Crédit Mutuel Arkéa (Le Relecq Kerhuon, France) (represented by: A. Casalonga, L. Codevelle and C. Bercial Arias, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel (Paris, France) (represented by: B. Moreau-Margotin and M. Merli, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 November 2017 (Case R 1724/2016-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Crédit Mutuel Arkéa and Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel.

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 8 November 2017 (Case R 1724/2016-5) in so far as it concludes that the contested mark acquired distinctive character through use for the goods and services for which it was descriptive and non-distinctive;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Dismisses the cross-claim;

4. Orders Crédit Mutuel Arkéa to bear a third of its own costs and to pay a third of the costs incurred by EUIPO and Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel in the main action;

5. Orders EUIPO to pay two thirds of its own costs and two thirds of the costs incurred by the applicant in the main action;

6. Orders Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel to bear two thirds of its own costs incurred in the main action and the costs incurred in the cross-claim.

(1) OJ C 94, 12.3.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2019 — M.I. Industries v EUIPO — Natural Instinct (NATURE’S VARIETY INSTINCT)

(Case T-288/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark NATURE’S VARIETY INSTINCT - Earlier national figurative mark Natural Instinct Dog and Cat food as nature intended - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 406/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: M.I. Industries, Inc. (Lincoln, Nebraska, United States) (represented by: M. Montañá Mora and S. Sebe Marin, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Natural Instinct Ltd (Southwark, United Kingdom) (represented by: E. Yates, Solicitor, and N. Zweck, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 February 2018 (Case R 1658/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Natural Instinct and M.I. Industries.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders M.I. Industries, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — Zhadanov v EUIPO (PDF Expert)

(Case T-404/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark PDF Expert - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 423/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Igor Zhadanov (Odessa, Ukraine) (represented by: P. Olson, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 April 2018 (Case R 1813/2017-2), relating to an application for registration of the sign PDF Expert as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Igor Zhadanov to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2019 — 6Minutes Media v EUIPO — ad pepper media International (ad pepper)

(Case T-666/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Figurative mark ad pepper - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 18(1)(a) and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character)

(2019/C 423/57)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: 6Minutes Media GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch and T. Hilser, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: ad pepper media International NV (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: S. Lux, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 June 2018 (Case R 839/2017-1), relating to revocation proceedings between 6Minutes Media and ad pepper media International.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders 6Minutes Media GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 November 2019 — Local-e-motion v EUIPO — Volkswagen (WE)

(Case T-568/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark WE - Earlier national word mark WE - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 432/56)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Local-e-motion GmbH (Dorsten, Germany) (represented by: D. Sprenger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek, M. Fischer and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: F. Thiering and L. Steidle, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 July 2018 (Case R 128/2018-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Volkswagen and Local-e-motion.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Local-e-motion to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2019 —Mahr v EUIPO — Especialidades Vira (Xocolat)

(Case T-58/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Xocolat - Earlier EU word mark LUXOCOLAT - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Reasoned statement in the notice of opposition - Rule 15(3)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 2(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625))

(2019/C 432/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ramona Mahr (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: T. Rohracher, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Śliwińska and A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Especialidades Vira, SL (Martorell, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 November 2017 (Case R 541/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Especialidades Vira and Ms Mahr.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Ramona Mahr to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Super bock group v EUIPO — Agus (Crystal)

(Case T-648/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Crystal - Earlier national word mark CRISTAL - Relative ground for refusal - No similarity between the goods - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 36/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Super bock group, SGPS SA (Leça do Balio, Portugal) (represented by: J.P. Mioludo, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Agus sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 July 2018 (Case R 299/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Unicer-Bebidas de Portugal, SGPS SA and Agus.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Super bock group, SGPS SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 November 2019 — August Wolff v EUIPO — Faes Farma (DermoFaes)

(Case T-643/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark DermoFaes - Earlier EU word mark Dermowas - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 19/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel (Bielefeld, Germany) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Faes Farma, SA (Lamiaco-Leioa, Spain) (represented by: A. Vela Ballesteros and S. Fernandez Malvar, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 June 2018 (Case R 1842/2017-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Dr. August Wolff and Faes Farma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Faes Farma, SA, including those necessarily incurred by Faes Farma, SA, before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

(1) OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Lloyd Shoes (LLOYD)

(Case T-729/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark LLOYD - Earlier EU figurative mark LLOYD’S - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 61/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Lloyd Shoes GmbH (Sulingen, Germany) (represented by: M. Stöckel, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 September 2018 (Case R 2385/2017-1), relating to opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés and Lloyd Shoes.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders El Corte Inglés, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

3. Orders Lloyd Shoes GmbH to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 44, 4.2.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2019 — Poland v Commission

(Case T-21/18) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Fruit and vegetable sectors - Aid to producer groups - Expenditure incurred by Poland - Deficiencies in key and secondary controls - Verification of recognition plans and recognition criteria - Checks on applications for aid - Eligibility of producer groups - Economic consistency - Necessity and eligibility for financing - Reasonableness of the expenditure - Systemic deficiencies - Risk to EAGF - Corrective measures - Flat-rate corrections of 25 %)

(2020/C 54/50)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, M. Pawlicka and D. Krawczyk, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Lewis and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2014 of 8 November 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2017 L 292, p. 61).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Poland to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Ramazani Shadary v Council

(Case T-173/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality)

(2020/C 103/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2020 — Stada Arzneimittel AG v EUIPO (ViruProtect)

(Case T-487/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark ViruProtect - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Duty to state reasons)

(2020/C 95/29)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Stada Arzneimittel AG (Bad Vilbel, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 June 2018 (Case R 1886/2017-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign ViruProtect as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Stada Arzneimittel AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 2 April 2020 –Barata v Parliament

(Case T-81/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - Certification procedure - 2016 promotion exercise - Exclusion of the applicant from the final list of officials authorised to take part in the training programme - Article 45a of the Staff Regulations - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Equal treatment - Rights of the defence)

(2020/C 175/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: João Miguel Barata (Evere, Belgium) (represented by: G. Pandey, D. Rovetta and V. Villante, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Steele and I. Terwinghe, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of the decision of 30 October 2017 by which the Parliament rejected the applicant’s complaint, secondly, the letter of 20 March 2017 containing the opinion of the Joint Certification Procedure Committee recommending that the appointing authority reject the applicant’s appeal, thirdly, the letter of 14 February 2017 notifying him of his results and informing him that a draft list of seven officials selected to take part in the training programme had been drawn up, fourthly, the letter of 8 December 2016 informing the applicant of his results following the first stage of the 2016 certification procedure, fifthly, the letter of 21 December 2016 informing the applicant of the action taken following his request for review and, sixthly, the notice of internal competition 2016/014 of 7 October 2016 communicated to staff on 20 October 2016 and the full draft list of officials admitted for participation in the resulting training programme.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr João Miguel Barata to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 142, 23.4.2018.