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

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Tequila Revolución v EUIPO — Horizons Group (London) (Revolution Vodka)

(Case T-628/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Revolution Vodka - Earlier EU word mark TEQUILA REVOLUCIÓN - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Absence of genuine use - Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 303/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Tequila Revolución S.A.P.I. De C.V. (Mexico City, Mexico) (represented by: M. Pomares Caballero, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Horizons Group (London) Ltd (Reading, United Kingdom)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 July 2021 (Case R 2266/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tequila Revolución S.A.P.I. De C.V. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 490, 6.12.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 June 2022 — F I S I v EUIPO — Verband der Deutschen Daunen- und Federnindustrie (ECODOWN)

(Case T-338/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark ECODOWN - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2022/C 294/41)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: F I S I Fibre sintetiche SpA (Oggiono, Italy) (represented by: G. Cartella and B. Cartella, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Verband der Deutschen Daunen- und Federnindustrie eV (Mayence, Germany) (represented by: M. Travostino and N. Bottero, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 13 April 2021 (Case R 216/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders F I S I Fibre sintetiche SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 320, 9.8.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — Unimax Stationery v EUIPO — Mitsubishi Pencil (uni)

(Case T-369/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark uni - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Signs or indications which have become customary - Article 7(1)(d) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(d) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2022/C 359/81)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Unimax Stationery (Daman, India) (represented by: E Amoah, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mitsubishi Pencil Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: A. Perani and G. Ghisletti, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 April 2021 (Case R 1909/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Unimax Stationery to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 338, 23.8.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — ALO jewelry CZ v EUIPO — Cartier International (ALOve)

(Case T-288/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark ALOve - Earlier international figurative mark LOVe - Relative ground for refusal - Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 340/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ALO jewelry CZ s. r. o. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: K. Čermák, 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: Cartier International AG (Steinhausen, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Zalewska, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 March 2021 (Case R 2679/2019-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ALO jewelry CZ s. r. o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — 6Minutes Media v EUIPO — ad pepper media International (ad pepper the e-advertising network)

(Case T-521/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark ad pepper the e-advertising network - 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)

(2022/C 418/40)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: 6Minutes Media GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: N. Marquard and P. Koch, 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:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 June 2021 (Case R 1621/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Peace United v EUIPO — 1906 Collins (bâoli)

(Case T-754/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark bâoli - Declaration of revocation - Absence of genuine use of the mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use - Abuse of rights)

(2022/C 418/46)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Peace United Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Artzimovitch, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: 1906 Collins LLC (Miami, Florida, United States) (represented by: C. Mateu, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 September 2021 (Case R 275/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Peace United Ltd to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 51, 31.1.2022.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — Van Walle v ECDC

(Case T-83/21) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - ECDC staff members - Decision not to renew a contract - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of powers - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Right to be heard - Action for annulment and for damages)

(2022/C 463/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ivo Van Walle (Järfälla, Sweden) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) (represented by: J. Mannheim, acting as Agent, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in the first place, annulment of the decision of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) of 30 March 2020 not to renew his contract as a member of the temporary staff; in the second place, principally, an order that ECDC pay him retroactively the net salary of which he was deprived between the non-renewal of his contract and the date of his reinstatement and, in the alternative, an order that ECDC compensate him for the material damage that he allegedly suffered; and, in the third place, compensation for the non-material damage that he allegedly suffered following the decision not to renew his contract.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Ivo Van Walle to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 48, 26.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Task Food v EUIPO — Foodtastic (ENERGY CAKE)

(Case T-686/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark ENERGY CAKE - Declaration of invalidity - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/2011))

(2022/C 432/33)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Task Food s.r.o. (Bratislava, Slovakia), authorised to replace energy cake GmbH (represented by: A. Bernegger, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Foodtastic GmbH (Dortmund, Germany)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 11 August 2021 (Case R 2324/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Authorises Task Food s.r.o. to replace energy cake GmbH as applicant;

2. Dismisses the action;

3. Orders Task Food to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 513, 20.12.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — WV v CdT

(Case T-618/21) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary agents - Sick leave - Unjustified absences - Termination of contract without notice - Article 16 of the CEOS - Article 48(b) of the CEOS - Liability)

(2022/C 463/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: WV (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (represented by: M. Garnier, acting as Agent, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the Director of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (‘CdT’) of 26 November 2020 terminating without notice his permanent employment, and, in so far as necessary, the decision of 17 June 2021 rejecting his complaint and, second, compensation for the harm which he claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Annuls the decision of 26 November 2020, by which the Director of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (‘CdT’) terminated the employment of WV as a temporary agent;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the CdT to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 462, 15.11.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — bett1.de v EUIPO — XXXLutz Marken (Body-Star)

(Case T-599/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Body-Star - Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard - Relative ground for refusal - Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of that regulation)

(2022/C 463/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: bett1.de GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: O. Brexl, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: XXXLutz Marken GmbH (Wels, Austria) (represented by: H. Pannen, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 July 2021 (Case R 1712/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 July 2021 (Case R 1712/2020-2) as regards ‘mattresses; mattress toppers; beds; bed frames; slatted bases for beds; bedding, except linen; cushions; pillows; neck-supporting pillows; waterbeds, not for medical purposes; air mattresses’ in Class 20 and ‘bed throws; bed linen and blankets; ticks [mattress covers]; mattress covers; ticks (mattress and pillow coverings); sleeping bags’ in Class 24;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 452, 8.11.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — WP and Others v Commission

(Case T-604/21) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the contract staff - Pensions - Pension rights acquired before entry into the service of the EU - Transfer to the EU scheme - Additional years of pensionable service - Application for restitution of the amount of transferred national pension rights - Dismissal of application - ‘Minimum subsistence figure’ rule - Undue enrichment - Equal treatment)

(2023/C 7/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: WP, WQ, WR (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and M. Brauhoff, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicants, as successors in title to A, seek annulment of the decision of the Office for Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) of the European Commission of 16 November 2020 dismissing the application for restitution of the national pension rights acquired by A before his death and transferred to the pension scheme of the EU institutions and annulment of Commission Decision of 15 June 2021 rejecting the complaint lodged by A under Article 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders WP, WQ and WR to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 452, 8.11.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — MCO (IP) v EUIPO — C8 (C2)

(Case T-461/21) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark C2 - Earlier national figurative mark C8 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Interdependence of factors - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 472/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: MCO (IP) Holdings Ltd (Tortola, British Virgin Islands) (represented by: A. Roughton, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: C8 (Issy-les-Moulineaux, France) (represented by: M. Georges-Picot and C. Cuny, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 May 2021 (Case R 909/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office of the European Union for Intellectual Property (EUIPO) of 26 May 2021 (Case R 909/2020-2) in so far as it relates to services for which only a low degree of similarity was found;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders MCO (IP) Holdings Ltd, EUIPO and C8 to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 412, 11.10.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2022 — Bora Creations v EUIPO (essence)

(Case T-738/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark essence - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2023/C 35/66)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Bora Creations, SL (Andratx, Spain) (represented by: R. Lange and M. Ebner, lawyers)

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

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 September 2021 (Case R 693/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bora Creations, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — Ryanair v Commission (Croatia Airlines; COVID-19)

(Case T-111/21) (1)

(State aid - Croatian air transport market - Aid granted by Croatia to an airline in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic - Direct grant - Decision not to raise any objections - Action for annulment - Individual concern - Admissibility - Serious difficulties - Aid intended to make good the damage caused by an exceptional occurrence - Equal treatment - Freedom of establishment - Free provision of services - Assessment of the damage - Obligation to state reasons)

(2023/C 15/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

Defendant: European Commission (represented by L. Flynn and C. Georgieva, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Croatia (represented by G. Vidović Mesarek, acting as Agent)

Re:

By its action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 8608 final of 30 November 2020 on State aid SA.55373 (2020/N) — Croatia — COVID-19: Damage compensation to Croatia Airlines (OJ 2021 C 17, p. 1).

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 Republic of Croatia to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 138, 19.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Olimp Laboratories v EUIPO (VITA-MIN MULTIPLE SPORT)

(Case T-9/22) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Application for the European Union word mark VITA-MIN MULTIPLE SPORT - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Lack of distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 418/47)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Olimp Laboratories sp. z o.o. (Dębica, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and reversal of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 November 2021 (Case R 771/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Olimp Laboratories sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 84, 21.2.2022.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 204/28

Order of the General Court of 17 May 2011 — Van Bennekom v Council and Commission

(Case T-206/96) (1)

2011/C 204/51

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 74, 8.3.1997.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 86/15

Order of the General Court of 29 January 2013 — Sagar v Commission

(Case T-269/00) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Reductions in social security contributions for undertakings in Venice and Chioggia - Decision declaring the aid scheme incompatible with the common market and imposing the recovery of the aid paid - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

2013/C 86/23

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Sagar Srl (Segrate, Italy) (represented by: A. Vianello, M. Merola and M. Pappalardo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, Agent, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: U. Leanza initially, then I. Braguglia, then R. Adam and finally I. Bruni, Agents, and by G. Aiello and P. Gentili, avvocati dello Stato)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000 L 150, p. 50)

Operative part of the order

1. The plea of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the main proceedings.

2. The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

3. Sagar Srl, in addition to bearing its own costs, is to pay the costs incurred by the Commission.

4. The Italian Republic is to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 9.12.2000.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 347/44

Order of the General Court of 6 October 2011 — Ciga and Others v Commission

(Case T-255/00) (1)

2011/C 347/79

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 355, 9.12.2000.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 37/48

Order of the General Court of 18 December 2009 — Enviro Tech Europe and Enviro Tech International v Commission

(Case T-422/03) (1)

2010/C 37/69

Language of the case: English

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 47, 21.2.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 64/37

Order of the Court of First Instance of 7 January 2008 — Marmara Import-Export v OHIM — Marmara Zeytin Tarim Satis (marmara)

(Case T-403/03) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2008/C 64/60)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Marmara Import-Export GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: A. von Arnswaldt and G. Rother, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Marmara Zeytin Tarim Satis Kooperatifleri Birligi (Bursa, Turkey) (represented by: A. Andorfer-Erhard, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 October 2003 (Case R 515/2002-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Marmara Import-Export GmbH and Marmara Zeytin Tarim Satis Kooperatifleri Birligi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court orders:

1. There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and pay one half each of the defendant's costs.

(1) OJ C 71, 20.3.2004.