ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Nevinnomysskiy Azot and NAK ‘Azot’ v Commission

(Case T-865/19) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of mixtures of urea and ammonium nitrate originating in Russia, Trinidad and Tobago and the United States - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1688 - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Dumping margin - Determination of the normal value - Adjustments - Construction of the export price - Fair comparison - Injury to the Union industry - Calculation of price undercutting - Sales between related companies - Causal link - Calculation of the injury margin - Injury elimination - ‘Lesser duty’ rule - Use of facts available)

(2022/C 432/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: AO Nevinnomysskiy Azot (Nevinnomyssk, Russia), AO Novomoskovskaya Aktsionernaya Kompania NAK ‘Azot’ (Novomoskovsk, Russia) (represented by: P. Vander Schueren and T. Martin-Brieu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Fertilizers Europe (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: B. O’Connor and M. Hommé, lawyers)

Re:

By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1688 of 8 October 2019 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of mixtures of urea and ammonium nitrate originating in Russia, Trinidad and Tobago and the United States of America (OJ 2019 L 258, p. 21).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders AO Nevinnomysskiy Azot and AO Novomoskovskaya Aktsionernaya Kompania NAK ‘Azot’ to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission and by Fertilizers Europe.

(1) OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — Klose v EUIPO (Representation of three coloured segments in a rectangle)

(Case T-81/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark representing three coloured segments in a rectangle - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 378/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Anne-Marie Klose (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: I. Seher, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO (represented by: A. Söder, agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 December 2019 (Case R 1955/2019-2), concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing three coloured segments in a rectangle as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Anne-Marie Klose to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 114, 6.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Oatly v EUIPO (IT’S LIKE MILK BUT MADE FOR HUMANS)

(Case T-253/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark IT’S LIKE MILK BUT MADE FOR HUMANS - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 72/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Oatly AB (Malmö, Sweden) (represented by: M. Johansson, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2020 (Case R 2446/2019-5), regarding an application for registration of the word sign IT’S LIKE MILK BUT MADE FOR HUMANS as an EU trade mark.

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 7 February 2020 (Case R 2446/2019-5), regarding an application for registration of the word sign IT’S LIKE MILK BUT MADE FOR HUMANS as an EU trade mark;

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Oatly AB.

(1) OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2020 — LG Electronics v EUIPO — Staszewski (K7)

(Case T-21/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark K7 - Earlier EU word mark k7 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 19/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, South Korea) (represented by: R. Schiffer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Miłosz Staszewski (Wrocław, Poland) (represented by: E. Gryc Zerych, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 October 2019 (Case R 401/2019 1), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Staszewski and LG Electronics.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LG Electronics, Inc., to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 March 2021 — Chatwal v EUIPO — Timehouse Capital (THE TIME)

(Case T-186/20) (1)

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

(2021/C 206/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Chatwal Hotels & Resorts LLC (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: N. Hine, solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Timehouse Capital GmbH (Grasbrunn, Germany) (represented by: T. Farkas, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 January 2020 (Case R 2264/2018-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Timehouse Capital and Chatwal Hotels & Resorts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Chatwal Hotels & Resorts LLC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2021 — Sahaj Marg Spirituality Foundation v EUIPO (Heartfulness)

(Case T-48/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Heartfulness - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 148/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sahaj Marg Spirituality Foundation (Manapakkam, India) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Sliwinska and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2019 (Case R 1266/2019-4), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark Heartfulness.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sahaj Marg Spirituality Foundation to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 April 2021 — Bibita Group v EUIPO — Benkomers (Beverage bottles)

(Case T-326/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a beverage bottle - Prior international design - Ground for invalidity - Conflict with a prior design - Individual character - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - Different overall impression - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(d)(iii) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2021/C 242/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bibita Group (Tirana, Albania) (represented by: C. Seyfert, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Benkomers OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 April 2020 (Case R 1070/2018 3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Bibita Group and Benkomers.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bibita Group to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 April 2021 — Apologistics v EUIPO — Kerckhoff (APO)

(Case T-282/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark APO - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 242/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Apologistics GmbH (Markkleeberg, Germany) (represented by: H. Hug and S. Schreiber, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Markus Kerckhoff (Bergisch Gladbach, Germany) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 February 2020 (Case R 982/2019-5), concerning invalidity proceedings between M. Kerckhoff and Apologistics.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Apologistics GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 –Riviera-Airport v EUIPO — Aéroports de la Côte d’Azur (RIVIERA AIRPORT)

(Case T-398/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark RIVIERA AIRPORT - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 297/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aeroporto di Villanova d’Albenga SpA (Riviera-Airport) (Villanova d’Albenga, Italy) (represented by: G. Casucci, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Aéroports de la Côte d’Azur (Nice, France) (represented by: Y. Bizollon, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2020 (Case R 2174/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Riviera-Airport and Aéroports de la Côte d’Azur.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Aeroporto di Villanova d’Albenga SpA (Riviera-Airport) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 271, 17.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2021 — Ryanair v Commission (Spain; Covid-19)

(Case T-628/20) (1)

(State aid - Spain - Recapitalisation measures to support undertakings that are systemic and strategic for the Spanish economy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic - Decision not to raise any objections - Temporary Framework for State aid - Measure aimed at remedying a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State - Measure aimed at the whole of the economy of a Member State - Principle of non-discrimination - Freedom to provide services and freedom of establishment - Proportionality - Criterion requiring that the beneficiaries of the aid are established in Spain - Failure to weigh the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition - Article 107(3)(b) TFEU - Concept of ‘aid scheme’ - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 263/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: F.C. Laprévote, E. Vahida, V. Blanc, I.G. Metaxas Maranghidis and S. Rating, lawyers)

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

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz and S. Centeno Huerta, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: P. Dodeller and T. Stehelin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 5414 final of 31 July 2020 on State Aid SA.57659 (2020/N) — Spain — COVID-19 — Recapitalisation fund.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the French Republic to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 414, 30.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Makk v EUIPO — Ubati Luxury Cosmetics (PANTA RHEI)

(Case T-501/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark PANTA RHEI - Earlier EU word mark PANTA RHEI - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 329/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stefan Makk (Graz, Austria) (represented by: I. Hödl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek and L. Lapinskaite, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ubati Luxury Cosmetics, SL (Alcobendas, Spain) (represented by: C. Vendrell, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 June 2020 (Case R 2337/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ubati Luxury Cosmetics and Mr Makk.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Stefan Makk to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Mélin v Parliament

(Case T-51/20) (1)

(Law governing the institutions - Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid - Plea of illegality - Rights of the defence - Error of fact)

(2021/C 320/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Joëlle Mélin (Aubagne, France) (represented by: F. Wagner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Ecker and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU, seeking annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 17 December 2019 relating to the recovery from the applicant of a sum of EUR 130 339,35 unduly paid by way of parliamentary assistance and the related debit note of 18 December 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Joëlle Mélin to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — IN v EISMEA

(Case T-119/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Decision not to renew - Appraisal - Right to be heard - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Manifest error of assessment - Reasonable time - Liability - Non-material damage)

(2021/C 357/35)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: IN (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Innovation Council and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Executive Agency (represented by: A. Galea, acting as Agent, and by A. Duron and D. Waelbroeck, lawyers)

Re:

APPLICATION under Article 270 TFEU for, first, annulment of the decision of the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) of 15 April 2019 not to renew the applicant’s contract and of the latter’s appraisal for the year 2018 as finalised on 3 June 2019 and, second, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the European Innovation Council and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Executive Agency (EISMEA) to pay to IN the amount of EUR 3 000;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Griba v CPVO (Gala Perathoner)

(Case T-182/20) (1)

(Plant varieties - Application for a Community plant variety right for the Gala Perathoner apple variety - Technical examination - Testing location - Equal treatment - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 349/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Griba Baumschulgenossenschaft landwirtschaftliche Gesellschaft (Terlano, Italy) (represented by: G. Würtenberger, lawyer)

Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office (represented by: M. Ekvad, O. Lamberti and F. Mattina, acting as Agents, and by A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of the CPVO of 17 January 2020 (Case A 004/2016) concerning an application for a Community plant variety right for the Gala Perathoner apple variety.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Griba Baumschulgenossenschaft landwirtschaftliche Gesellschaft to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — SBG v EUIPO — VF International (Geographical Norway)

(Case T-460/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Geographical Norway - Absolute ground for refusal - Absolute ground for invalidity - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 431/38)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Super Brand Licencing (SBG) (Villeurbanne, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and A. Sion, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: VF International Sagl (Stabio, Switzerland) (represented by: T. van Innis and A. Van der Planken, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 April 2020 (Case R 662/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between VF International and SBG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 April 2020 (Case R 662/2019-1);

2. Orders EUIPO and VF International Sagl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 1 September 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO — Vieta Audio (Vita)

(Case T-561/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark Vita - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark was registered)

(2021/C 422/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and P. Ruess, lawyer)

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

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 June 2020 (Case R 425/2020-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Vieta Audio and Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 3.11.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — Boshab v Council

(Case T-107/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons subject to restrictive measures - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 452/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Évariste Boshab (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan)

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

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 134), and, second, Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 1) in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Évariste Boshab to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Le-Vel Brands (Le-Vel)

(Case T-331/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Le-Vel - Earlier national word mark LEVEL - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity of the goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 452/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa Rodríguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Vuijst and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Le-Vel Brands, LLC (Frisco, Texas, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 March 2020 (Case R 2113/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Ern and Le-Vel Brands.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Laboratorios Ern, SA, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.