ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 5/27

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EBA

(Case T-229/15) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Provision of interim staff for IT services - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment))

(2018/C 005/36)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) and European Dynamics Belgium SA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: I. Ampazis, M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, then M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and D. Papadopoulou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Banking Authority (EBA) (represented by: J. Overett Somnier, J. Mifsud and S. Giordano, acting as Agents, assisted by H.-G. Kamann and A. Dritsa, lawyers)

Re:

First, an action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the EBA of 2 March 2015 rejecting the applicants’ tender submitted in response to the restricted tendering procedure EBA/2014/06/OPS/SER/RT with respect to Lot 1, titled ‘Supply of interim staff: Supply of interim staff for Information Technology’ and, second, an action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for harm that the applicants allegedly suffered following that decision as a result of the loss of opportunity to be ranked in first place in the cascade the contract award procedure at issue, amounting to EUR 300 000, together with interest

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE and European Dynamics Belgium SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2015
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 72/31

Judgment of the General Court of 18 January 2018 — Kenup Foundation and Others v EIT

(Case T-76/15) (1)

((Technological research and development - EIT - Framework programme Horizon 2020 for research and innovation - Call for proposals with a view to the designation of a Knowledge and Innovation Community - Rejection of the applicant’s proposal - Regulation (EC) No 294/2008 - Regulation (EU) No 1290/2013 - Unlawful delegation of powers))

(2018/C 072/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Kenup Foundation (Kalkara, Malta) Candena GmbH (Luneburg, Germany), CO BIK Center odličnosti za biosenzoriko, instrumentacijo in procesno kontrolo (Ajdovščina, Slovenia), Evotec AG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: initially by: U. Soltész, C. Wagner, H. Weiß and A. Richter, and subsequently by: U. Soltész, H. Weiß and A. Richter, and finally by: U. Soltész and H. Weiß, lawyers)

Defendant: European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) (represented by: M. Kern, acting as Agent, and P. de Bandt and M. Gherghinaru, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the applicants: Republic of Malta (represented by: M.E. Perici Calascione, lawyer) and Stiftung Universität Lüneburg (represented by: F. Oehl, lawyer)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, seeking the annulment of the decisions of 9 December 2014, the import of which was sent by letter of 10 December 2014, by which the EIT designated the Knowledge and Innovation Community (KIC) ‘Innovation for Healthy Living and Active Ageing’ and rejected the Kenup consortium’s proposal.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of 9 December 2014, the import of which was sent by letter of 10 December 2014, by which the European Institute of Innovation and Technology designated the Knowledge and Innovation Community (KIC) ‘Innovation for Healthy Living and Active Ageing’ and rejected the Kenup consortium’s proposal;

2. Orders the EIT to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Kenup Foundation, Candena GmbH, CO BIK Center odličnosti za biosenzoriko, instrumentacijo in procesno kontrolo and Evotec AG.

(1) OJ C 146, 4.5.2015.
Joined Cases T-306/15 and T-484/15: Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2018 — KV v EACEA (Arbitration clause — Grant agreements concluded in the context of the Lifelong Learning Programme (2007-2013) — NEST and ‘This is IT’ projects — Ineligible costs — Reclassification of the action)

Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2018 — KV v EACEA

(Joined Cases T-306/15 and T-484/15) ( 1 )

‛(Arbitration clause — Grant agreements concluded in the context of the Lifelong Learning Programme (2007-2013) — NEST and ‘This is IT’ projects — Ineligible costs — Reclassification of the action)’

Parties

Applicant: KV (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) (represented initially by: H. Monet and D. Homann, and subsequently by H. Monet, acting as Agents)

Re:

Actions pursuant to Article 272 TFEU and seeking a declaration that, by declaring ineligible some of the staff costs incurred by the applicant in connection with the Network for Staff and Teachers in Childcare Services (‘NEST’) and Facilitating and fostering digital competence through volunteers — This is IT (‘This is IT’) projects, the EACEA did not correctly interpret and apply the contractual provisions relating to those projects.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-306/15 and T-484/15 for the purposes of the decision closing the proceedings;

2. Dismisses the actions;

3. Orders KV to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.
3.

Annuls the decisions of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office of 2 April 2015 (Cases R 2245/2014-5, R 2247/2014-5, R 2248/2014-5, R 2249/2014-5 and R 2250/2014-5) in respect of the goods and services other than those which do not form part of the usual range of petrol stations (aviation fuel, petroleum coke, xylenes and wholesale fuel) and which are covered by the marks applied for;
Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2018 — Scandlines Danmark and Scandlines Deutschland v Commission

(Case T-630/15) (1)

((State aid - Public financing of the Fehmarn Belt fixed link rail-road project - Individual aid - Decision not to raise any objections - Decision finding no State aid and declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Definition of State aid - Adverse effect on competition and effect on trade between Member States - Conditions governing compatibility - Aid to promote the execution of an important project of common European interest - Necessity of the aid - Incentive effect - Proportionality of the aid - Serious difficulties justifying the initiation of the formal investigation procedure - Obligation to state reasons - Communication on State aid to promote the execution of important projects of common European interest))

(2019/C 82/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Scandlines Danmark ApS (Copenhagen, Denmark) and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: initially L. Sandberg-Mørch and M.-E. Vitali, and subsequently L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Armati, L. Flynn and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Naturschutzbund Deutschland (NABU) eV (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: T. Hohmuth, lawyer); and Föreningen Svensk Sjöfart (Gothenburg, Sweden) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch and J. Buendía Sierra, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: initially C. Thorning, and subsequently J. Nymann-Lindegren, acting as Agents, and R. Holdgaard, lawyer)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2015) 5023 final of 23 July 2015 on State aid SA.39078 (2014/N) (Denmark) for the financing of the Fehmarn Belt fixed link project (OJ 2015 C 325, p. 5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2015) 5023 final of 23 July 2015 on State aid SA.39078 (2014/N) (Denmark) for the financing of the Fehmarn Belt fixed link project (OJ 2015 C 325, p. 5) in so far as the Commission decided not to raise any objections to the measures granted by the Kingdom of Denmark to Femern A/S for the planning, construction and operation of the Fehmarn Belt fixed link;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Scandlines Danmark ApS and Scandlines Deutschland GmbH;

4. Orders the Kingdom of Denmark, Föreningen Svensk Sjöfart and Naturschutzbund Deutschland (NABU) eV to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 59, 15.2.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 2 July 2019 — Fulmen v Council

(Case T-405/15) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against the Islamic Republic of Iran - Freezing of funds - Compensation for harm allegedly suffered by the applicant following the inclusion and retention of its name on lists of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures - Material damage - Non-material damage)

(2019/C 288/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Fulmen (Teheran, Iran) (represented by: A. Bahrami and N. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro and M. Bishop, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented initially by A. Aresu and D. Gauci, and subsequently by A. Aresu and R. Tricot, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant following the adoption of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p.39), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2010 of 26 July 2010 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 25), Council Decision 2010/644/CFSP of 25 October 2010 amending Decision 2010/413 (OJ 2010 L 281 p 81, ), and Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p.1), by which the name of the applicant was included and retained on the lists of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay Fulmen compensation of EUR 50 000 for the non-material damage suffered;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Fulmen, the Council and the Commission to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2019 — Hungary v Commission

(Case T-139/15) (1)

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - EAGF - Sugar - Temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the European Community - Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 - Regulation (EC) No 968/2006 - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Hungary - Conditions for the grant of aid for full dismantling and aid for partial dismantling - Concept of ‘production facilities’ - Assessment of the use of silos on the date of submission of the application for aid - Concept of ‘full dismantling’ - Annex 2 to document VI/5330/97 - Difficulties in the interpretation of EU legislation - Cooperation in good faith)

(2019/C 148/38)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Hungary (represented by: initially M. Fehér, G. Koós and A. Pálfy, and subsequently M. Fehér, G. Koós, Zs. Biró-Tóth and E. Tóth, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Ondrůšek and B. Béres, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: French Republic (represented by: D. Colas, acting as Agent), Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent and C. Colelli, avvocato dello Stato)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/103 of 16 January 2015 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 2015 L 16, p. 33) in so far as it excluded an amount of EUR 11 709 400 from financing, by EAGF, in restructuring aid in the sugar sector granted by Hungary.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hungary to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Commission to bear half of its own costs;

4. Orders the French Republic and the Italian Republic to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — ADR Center v Commission

(Case T-364/15) (1)

(Financial aid - General Programme ‘Fundamental Rights and Justice’ for the period 2007-2013 - Specific Programme ‘Civil Justice’ - Action for annulment - Enforceable decision - Grant agreements - Recovery of part of the financial contribution paid - Action for a declaratory judgment - Arbitration clause - Force majeure - Eligible costs - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 452/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ADR Center Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: A. Guillerme and T. Bontinck, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà and M. Ilkova, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application seeking, first, annulment, under Article 263 TFEU, of Commission Decision C(2015) 3117 final of 4 May 2015 relating to the recovery of part of the financial contribution paid to the applicant pursuant to two grant agreements concluded under the Specific Programme ‘Civil Justice’ and, second, a declaration that the costs which the Commission declared ineligible in that decision are eligible.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ADR Center Srl to pay the costs in the main proceedings and in the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 302, 14.9.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 2 July 2019 — Mahmoudian v Council

(Case T-406/15) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran - Freezing of funds - Restrictions on admission to the territories of the Member States - Compensation for the damage allegedly suffered as a result of the inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures - Material damage - Non-material damage)

(2019/C 328/38)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Fereydoun Mahmoudian (Tehran, Iran) (represented by A. Bahrami and N. Korogiannikis, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro and M. Bishop, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented initially by A. Aresu and D. Gauci, then by A. Aresu and R. Tricot acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation in respect of the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the adoption of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 39), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2010 of 26 July 2010 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 25), Council Decision 2010/644/CFSP of 25 October 2010 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 81), and Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010, L 281, p. 1), by which the applicant’s name was included and maintained on the lists of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay Mr Fereydoun Mahmoudian EUR 71 000 in compensation for the non-material damage suffered;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Mr Fereydoun Mahmoudian, the Council and the Commission each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/32

Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2016 — K&K Group v EUIPO — Pret A Manger (Europe) (Pret A Diner)

(Case T-2/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Pret A Diner - Earlier EU figurative mark PRET A MANGER - Earlier national word mark PRET - Relative ground for refusal - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctiveness or the repute of the earlier marks - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 022/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: K&K Group AG (Cham, Switzerland) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and N. Bertram, 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: Pret A Manger (Europe) Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 October 2015 (Case R 2825/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Pret A Manger (Europe) and K&K Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders K&K Group AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/19

Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2017 — Puma v EUIPO (FOREVER FASTER)

(Case T-104/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark FOREVER FASTER - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Equal treatment - Principle of sound administration))

(2017/C 129/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 January 2016 (Case R 770/2015-1) relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark FOREVER FASTER.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Puma SE to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 10.5.2016, p. 16.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/29

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Opko Ireland Global Holdings v EUIPO — Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (ALPHAREN)

(Case T-88/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ALPHAREN - Earlier national word marks ALPHA D3 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Consideration of new evidence by the Board of Appeal following a judgment annulling a decision - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 078/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, A. Smith and D. Meale, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Jerusalem, Israel)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 December 2015 (Case R 2387/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Opko Ireland Global Holdings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Opko Ireland Global Holdings Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 136, 18.4.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 178/14

Judgment of the General Court of 24 April 2017 — HF v Parliament

(Case T-584/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Member of the auxiliary contract staff - Article 3b of the CEOS - Successive employments as a member of the auxiliary contract staff - Fixed-term contracts - Decision not to renew - Abuse of power - Request for assistance - Right to be heard - Non-contractual liability))

(2017/C 178/17)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: HF (represented by: A. Tymen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Deneys and S. Alves, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking, firstly, the annulment of the Parliament’s decision not to renew the applicant’s contract as a member of the auxiliary contract staff and, secondly, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant, essentially as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms HF to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 10.5.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-14/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 151/35

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2017 — Apax Partners UK v EUIPO — Apax Partners Midmarket (APAX PARTNERS)

(Case T-209/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Application for the EU word mark APAX PARTNERS - Earlier international word mark APAX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the services - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 151/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Apax Partners UK Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Rose and J. Warner, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Apax Partners Midmarket (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Joly, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 February 2016 (Case R 1611/2014-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Apax Partners Midmarket and Apax Partners UK.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Apax Partners UK Ltd to pay the costs, including those necessarily incurred by Apax Partners Midmarket for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.