ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 462/22

Judgment of the General Court of 7 November 2014 — Kaatsu Japan v OHIM (KAATSU)

(Case T-567/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark KAATSU - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rights of the defence - Article 75, second sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2014/C 462/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kaatsu Japan Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar and I. Harrington, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 October 2012 (Case R 435/2012-2), relating to an application for registration of the word sign KAATSU as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kaatsu Japan Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 421/35

Judgment of the General Court of 9 October 2014 — Bermejo Garde v EESC

(Case T-530/12 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Psychological harassment - Illegal activities affecting the interests of the European Union - Serious failure to comply with the obligations of officials - Articles 12(a) and 22(a) of the Staff Regulations - Denunciation by the appellant - Reassignment following that denunciation - No consultation of OLAF by the immediate superior who received the information - Measures adversely affecting a person - Good faith - Rights of the defence - Competence of the authority issuing the measure))

2014/C 421/48

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Moises Bermejo Garde (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (represented initially by G. Nijborg, and subsequently by U. Schwab and M. Lernhart, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 25 September 2012 in Bermejo Garde v EESC (F-41/10, not yet published in the ECR), seeking the setting aside of that judgment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 25 September 2012 in Bermejo Garde v EESC (F-41/10) in so far as it dismisses Mr Moises Bermejo Garde’s action for annulment of Decision No 133/10 A of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) of 24 March 2010 relieving him of his previous post and of EESC Decision No 184/10 A of 13 April 2010 concerning his reassignment;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the appeal;

3. Refers the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal;

4. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 81/15

Judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2015 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Holsten Brauerei (H)

(Case T-193/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Community - Figurative mark H - Earlier national figurative mark H - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Failure to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 081/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Holsten-Brauerei AG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: N. Hebeis and R. Douglas, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 February 2012 (Case R 2340/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Holsten-Brauerei AG and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 194, 30.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 34/32

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2014 — Inter-Union Technohandel v OHIM — Gumersport Mediterranea de Distribuciones (PROFLEX)

(Case T-278/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark PROFLEX - Earlier national word mark PROFEX - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 034/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Inter-Union Technohandel GmbH (Landau in der Pfalz, Germany) (represented by: K. Schmidt-Hern and A. Feutlinske, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Gumersport Mediterranea de Distribuciones, SL (Barcelona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2012 (Case R 413/2011-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Inter-Union Technohandel GmbH and Gumersport Mediterranea de Distribuciones, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 27 March 2012 (Case R 413/2011-2).

2) Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 171/24

Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2015 — Deutsche Börse v Commission

(Case T-175/12) (1)

((Competition - Concentrations - Financial instruments sector - European derivatives market - Decision declaring that the concentration is incompatible with the internal market - Assessment of the effects of the transaction on competition - Efficiency gains - Commitments))

(2015/C 171/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Börse AG (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: C. Zschocke, J. Beninca and T. Schwarze, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Christoforou, V. Bottka, N. Khan and B. Mongin, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Icap Securities Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: C.T. Riis-Madsen, lawyer, and S. Stephanou, Solicitor)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2012) 440 final of 1 February 2012, declaring a concentration to be incompatible with the internal market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.6166 — Deutsche Börse/NYSE Euronext).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Deutsche Börse AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by Icap Securities Ltd.

(1) OJ C 174, 16.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 118/24

Judgment of the General Court of 26 February 2015 — France v Commission

(Case T-135/12) (1)

((State aid - Pensions - Aid for the reform of the arrangements for financing the retirement pensions of civil servants working for France Télécom - Reduction of the compensation to be paid to the State by France Télécom - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market under certain conditions - Advantage))

(2015/C 118/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented by: initially E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, J. Gstalter and J. Rossi, then D. Colas Diégo and R. Coesme, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky, L. Flynn and D. Grespan, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/540/EU of 20 December 2011 on State aid C 25/08 (ex NN 23/08) reform of the arrangements for financing the retirement pensions of civil servants working for France Télécom implemented by the French Republic in favour of France Télécom (OJ 2012, L 279, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 174, 16.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 279/31

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2015 — Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll v OHIM — Redrock Construction (REDROCK)

(Case T-548/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark REDROCK - Earlier national word marks ROCK, KEPROCK, FLEXIROCK, FORMROCK, FLOOR-ROCK, TERMAROCK, KLIMAROCK, SPEEDROCK, DUROCK, SPLITROCK, PLANAROCK, TOPROCK, KLEMMROCK, FIXROCK, SONOROCK PLUS, VARIROCK, SONOROCK and MASTERROCK - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 279/38)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll GmbH & Co. OHG (Gladbeck, Germany) (represented by: J. Krenzel, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Mahelka, P. Geroulakos and M. Rajh, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Redrock Construction s.r.o. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: D. Krofta, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 October 2012 (Case R 1596/2011-4), concerning invalidity proceedings between Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll GmbH & Co. OHG and Redrock Construction s.r.o.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Deutsche Rockwool Mineralwoll GmbH & Co. OHG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 213/26

Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2015 — Ternavsky v Council

(Case T-163/12) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Belarus - Freezing of funds - Restrictions on entry into and transit through the territory of the European Union - Error of assessment))

(2015/C 213/46)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Anatoly Ternavsky (Moscow, Russia) (represented initially by C. Raspin and E. Van den Haute, lawyers, subsequently by G. Berrisch, A. Polcyn, lawyers, and N. Chesaites, Barrister, and lastly by G. Berrisch)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: F. Naert and M.-M. Joséphidès, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2012/171/CFSP of 23 March 2012 implementing Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2012 L 87, p. 95), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 265/2012 of 23 March 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2012 L 87, p. 37), of Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2013 L 288, p. 69), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2013 L 288, p. 1), of Council Implementing Decision 2014/24/CFSP of 20 January 2014 implementing Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2014 L 16, p. 32), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 46/2014 of 20 January 2014 implementing Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2014 L 16, p. 3) in so far as they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Decision 2012/171/CFSP of 23 March 2012 implementing Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 265/2012 of 23 March 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus in so far as they concern Mr Anatoly Ternavsky;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay one-half of those incurred by Mr Ternavsky in the present proceedings;

4. Orders Mr Ternavsky to bear other half of his own costs in the present proceedings and tol bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the Council in the application for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 157, 2.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 429/15

Judgment of the General Court of 28 October 2015 — Hammar Nordic Plugg v Commission

(Case T-253/12) (1)

((State aid - Sale and leasing of land and a production site - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering recovery thereof - No competitive tendering procedure - Determination of the market price - Private investor test - Effect on trade between Member States))

(2015/C 429/19)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Hammar Nordic Plugg AB (Trollhättan, Sweden) (represented by: I. Otken Eriksson and U. Öberg, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Grespan and P.-J. Loewenthal, Agents, assisted by L. Sandberg-Morch, lawyer)

Re:

Application for the annulment of Commission Decision 2012/293/EU of 8 February 2012 on State aid SA.28809 (C 29/10) (ex NN 42/10 and ex CP 194/09) implemented by Sweden in favour of Hammar Nordic Plugg AB (OJ 2012 L 150, p. 78)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hammar Nordic Plugg AB to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 258, 25.8.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 363/26

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2015 — Novartis Europharm v Commission

(Case T-472/12) (1)

((Medicinal products for human use - Marketing authorisation for the generic medicinal product Zoledronic acid Teva Pharma - zoledronic acid - Regulatory data protection period for the reference medicinal products Zometa and Aclasta, containing the active substance zoledronic acid - Directive 2001/83/EC - Regulation (EEC) No 2309/93 and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 - Global marketing authorisation - Regulatory data protection period))

(2015/C 363/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Novartis Europharm Ltd (Horsham, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Schoonderbeek, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by A. Sipos, and, subsequently by M. Wilderspin, P. Mihaylova and M. Šimerdová, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Teva Pharma BV (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: K. Bacon, Barrister, and C. Firth, Solicitor)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision C (2012) 5894 final of 16 August 2012 granting a marketing authorisation in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council for the medicinal product for human use ‘Zoledronic acid Teva Pharma — zoledronic acid’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Novartis Europharm Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission and by Teva Pharma BV.

(1) OJ C 389, 15.12.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 251/21

Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2016 — Mega Brands v EUIPO — Diset (MAGNEXT)

(Case T-292/12 RENV) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union word mark MAGNEXT - Earlier national word mark MAGNET 4 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 251/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Nordemann and M. Maier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented initially by V. Melgar and subsequently by H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Diset, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2012 (Case R 1722/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Diset and Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 April 2012 (Case R 1722/2011-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug.

(1) OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/13

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2016 — Toshiba v Commission

(Case T-404/12) (1)

((Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in gas insulated switchgear projects - New decision taken following annulment in part of the initial decision by the Court - Fines - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons - Equal treatment - Starting amount - Extent of contribution to the infringement))

(2016/C 078/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Toshiba Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J. MacLennan, Solicitor, A. Schulz and S. Sakellariou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application, principally, for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2012) 4381 of 27 June 2012 amending Decision C(2006) 6762 final of 24 January 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (now Article 101 TFEU) and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement to the extent that it was addressed to Mitsubishi Electric Corp. and Toshiba Corp. (Case COMP/39.966 — Gas Insulated Switchgear — Fines), and, in the alternative, for the reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Toshiba Corp. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 343, 10.11.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/36

Judgment of the General Court of 1 July 2014 — You-View.tv v OHIM — YouView TV (YouView+)

(Case T-480/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark YouView+ - Earlier Benelux figurative trade mark You View You-View.tv - Late submission of documents - Discretion granted by Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Concept of a ‘provision to the contrary’ - Rule 20(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

2014/C 282/47

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: You-View.tv (Anvers, Belgium) (represented by: S. Criel, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: YouView TV Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 June 2013 (Case R 2112/2012-4) relating to opposition proceedings between You-View.tv and YouView TV Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 18 June 2013 (Case R 2112/2012-4), relating to opposition proceedings between You-View.tv and YouView TV Ltd.

2) Dismisses the remainder of the heads of claim.

3) Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 334, 23.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 202/22

Judgment of the General Court of 20 May 2014 — De Luca v Commission

(Case T-200/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Appointment - Classification in grade - Appointment to a post in a higher function group following an open competition - Dismissal of the appeal at first instance after it was referred back by the General Court - Entry into force of the new Staff Regulations - Transitional provisions - Article 12(3) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations))

2014/C 202/27

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Patrizia De Luca (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: initially S. Orlandi and J.-N. Louis, lawyers, then S. Orlandi)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall, Agent); and Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and A. Bisch, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 30 January 2013 in Case F-20/06 RENV De Luca v Commission, not yet published, requesting that that judgment be set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Ms Patrizia De Luca and the European Commission to each bear their own costs in the two proceedings before the General Court and in the two proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs in the two proceedings before the General Court and in the two proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal.

(1) OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 388/13

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2014 — Tegometall International v OHIM — Irega (MEGO)

(Case T-11/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark MEGO - Relative ground for refusal - Earlier opposition proceedings - No application of the principle of res judicata))

2014/C 388/15

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Tegmotall International AG (Lengwil, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Timmann and E. Schaper, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Irega AG (Zuchwil, Switzerland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 October 2012 (Case R 1522/2011-1), concerning invalidity proceedings between Tegometall International AG and Irega AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 25 October 2012 (Case R 1522/2011-1);

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Tegometall International AG before the General Court as well as the Board of Appeal.

(1) OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 292/44

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2014 — NIIT Insurance Technologies v OHIM (SUBSCRIBE)

(Case T-404/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark SUBSCRIBE - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Equal treatment - Article 56 TFEU))

2014/C 292/54

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: NIIT Insurance Technologies Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Wirtz, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Schifko, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 June 2013 (Case R 1308/2012-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign SUBSCRIBE as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders NIIT Insurance Technologies Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 274, 21.9.2013.