ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 272/20

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 September 2008 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-181/06) (1)

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Financial adjustments - Fruit and vegetables - Dairy products - Arable farming - Rural development - Non-compliance with payment deadlines)

(2008/C 272/37)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G.Aiello, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C.Cattabriga and F.Jimeno Fernandez, acting as Agents, and A.Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2006/334/EC of 28 April 2006 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ L 124, p. 21) in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Italian Republic in the sectors of fruit and vegetables, milk and dairy products, arable farming, rural development as well as concerning payment deadlines.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/28

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 16 December 2008 — Torres v OHIM — Navisa Industrial Vinícola Española (MANSO DE VELASCO)

(Case T-259/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark MANSO DE VELASCO - Earlier national word mark VELASCO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 32/51)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Miguel Torres, SA (Vilafranca del Penedés, Spain) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and A. Castán Pérez-Gómez, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Navisa Industrial Vinícola Española, SA (Montilla, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 June 2006 (Case R 865/2005-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Navisa Industrial Vinícola Española, SA and Miguel Torres, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Miguel Torres SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 29, 2.12.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/22

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2008 — Rautaruukki v OHIM — (RAUTARUUKKI)

(Case T-269/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark RAUTARUUKKI - Absolute grounds for refusal of registration - Descriptive character - Absence of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Evidence offered in support)

(2009/C 6/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rautaruukki Oyj (Helsinki, Finland) (represented by: P. Hagman, lawyer)

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

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 July 2006 (Case R 48/2006-4) concerning the registration of the word mark RAUTARUUKKI as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Rautaruukki Oyj to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 281, 18.11.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 153/35

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 7 May 2009 — Omnicare v OHIM

(Case T-277/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark OMNICARE - Earlier national figurative mark OMNICARE - Refusal of an application for restitutio in integrum)

2009/C 153/67

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Omnicare, Inc. (Covington, Kentucky, United States) (represented initially by M. Edenborough, Barrister, and O. Patterson, Solicitor, and subsequently by M. Edenborough)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by S. Laitinen, and subsequently by G. Schneider, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance: Astellas Pharma GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Franke, lawyer)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 July 2006 (Case R 446/2006-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Yamanouchi Pharma GmbH and Omnicare, Inc. and rejecting the application for restitutio in integrum brought by the latter.

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 24 July 2006 (Case R 446/2006-2);

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Omnicare, Inc.;

3. Orders Astellas Pharma GmbH to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 2.12.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 82/23

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 February 2009 — Sara Lee/DE NV v OHIM — Cooperativa italiana di ristorazione (PIAZZA del SOLE)

(Case T-265/06) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark PIAZZA del SOLE - Earlier national and international word marks PIAZZA and PIAZZA D'ORO - Relative ground for refusal - Lack of likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Lack of similarity of the signs)

(2009/C 82/40)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Sara Lee/DE NV (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: C. Hollier-Larousse, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Cooperativa italiana di ristorazione Soc. coop. rl (Reggio d'Emilia, Italy) (represented by: D. Caneva, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 July 2006 (Case R 235/2005-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Sara Lee/DE NV and Cooperativa italiana di ristorazione Soc. Coop. rl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sara Lee/DE NV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 2.12.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/38

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 October 2009 — FAB v Commission

(Case T-8/06) (1)

(State aid - Digital terrestrial television - Aid granted by the German authorities to broadcasters which use the digital terrestrial television network (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery - Action for annulment - Meaning of State aid - State resources - Compensation for discharging public service obligations - Aid intended to promote culture - Legitimate expectations)

2009/C 282/71

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: FAB Fernsehen aus Berlin GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Böken, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. van Vliet and K. Gross, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Deutscher Kabelverband eV (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: K. Struckmann, C Arhold and N. Wimmer, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2006/513/EC of 9 November 2005 on the State Aid which the Federal Republic of Germany has implemented for the introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg (OJ 2006 L 200, p. 14).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders FAB Fernsehen aus Berlin GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 86 of 8.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/23

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 9 September 2009 — Holland Malt v Commission

(Case T-369/06) (1)

(State aid - Malt production - Investment aid - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market - Adverse effect on competition - Effect on trade between Member States - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based - Guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector)

2009/C 256/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Holland Malt BV (Lieshout, Netherlands) (represented initially by: O. Brouwer and D. Mes, and subsequently by O. Brouwer, A. Stoffer and P. Schepens, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: T. Scharf and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels, M. de Grave, C. ten Dam and Y. de Vries, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/59/EC of 26 September 2006 concerning the State aid granted by the Netherlands to Holland Malt BV (OJ 2007 L 32, p. 76).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Holland Malt BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission;

3. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 42, 24.2.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/22

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 — Trioplast Industrier v Commission

(Case T-40/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for industrial plastic sacks - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Duration of the infringement - Fines - Seriousness of the infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Proportionality - Joint and several liability - Principal of legal certainty)

2010/C 301/33

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Trioplast Industrier AB (Smålandsstenar, Sweden) (represented by: T. Pettersson and O. Larsson, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, P. Hellström and V. Bottka, subsequently F. Castillo de la Torre, L. Parpala and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a procedure under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial sacks) concerning an agreement in the market for industrial plastic sacks and, in the alternative, an application for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the first paragraph of Article 2(f) of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 of 30 November 2005 relating to a procedure under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial sacks) in so far as it relates to Trioplast Industrier AB;

2. Fixes at EUR 2.73 million the amount ascribed to Trioplast Industrier, on the basis of which its share of the successive parent companies’ joint and several liability is to be established for payment of the fine imposed on Trioplast Wittenheim SA;

3. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

4. Orders Trioplast Industrier to bear half of its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by the Commission;

5. Orders the Commission to bear half of its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Trioplast Industrier.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 134/29

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 19 March 2010 — Gollnisch v Parliament

(Case T-42/06) (1)

(Privileges and immunities - Member of the European Parliament - Decision not to defend his privileges and immunities - Action for annulment - No longer any interest in bringing proceedings - No need to adjudicate - Action for damages - Conduct alleged against the Parliament - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Causal link)

2010/C 134/48

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Bruno Gollnisch (Limonest, France) (represented by: W. de Saint Just and G. Dubois, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: H. Krück, C. Karamarcos and A. Padowska and subsequently by H. Krück, D. Moore and A. Padowska, Agents)

Re:

Application for, first, annulment of the decision of the European Parliament of 13 December 2005 not to defend the immunity and privileges of Mr Bruno Gollnisch and, second, compensation for the damage suffered by Mr Gollnisch as a result of that decision

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Rules that there is no need to adjudicate on the claim for annulment;

2. Dismisses the claim for damages;

3. Orders the European Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Mr Bruno Gollnisch, including those relating to the application for interim measures;

4. Orders Mr Bruno Gollnisch to bear one third of his costs, including those relating to the application for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 226/21

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2011 — SNIA v Commission

(Case T-194/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Imputability of the infringement - Acquisition of a company liable for the infringement - Rights of the defence - Consistency between the statement of objections and the contested decision - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)

2011/C 226/41

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: SNIA SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: A. Santa Maria, B. Biscaretti di Ruffia and E. Gambaro, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by V. Di Bucci and F. Amato, and subsequently by V. Di Bucci and V. Bottka, Agents)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 1766 final of 3 May 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.620 — Hydrogen peroxide and perborate) in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SNIA SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 145/21

Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2011 — Tomkins v Commission

(Case T-382/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Copper and copper alloy fittings sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Imputability of the infringement - Duration of the infringement)

2011/C 145/32

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tomkins plc (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. Soames, S. Jordan, Solicitors, and J. Joshua, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Nijenhuis and V. Bottka, acting as Agents, and by S. Kinsella and K. Daly, Solicitors)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2006) 4180 of 20 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F-1/38.121 — Fittings), and also for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2006) 4180 of 20 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F-1/38.121 — Fittings) in so far as it relates to the period from 31 December 1988 to 29 October 1993 with respect to Tomkins plc;

2. Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Tomkins plc under Article 2(h) of Decision C(2006) 4180 at EUR 4,25 million, in respect of which it is jointly and severally liable with Pegler Ltd as to EUR 3,4 million;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 42, 24.2.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/10

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Stempher and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher v Commission

(Case T-68/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Fines - Limitation period - Proof of the infringement)

2012/C 6/14

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicants: Stempher BV (Rijssen, Netherlands) and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher CV (Rijssen) (represented by: J. de Pree and E. Pijnacker Hordijk, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Nijenhuis and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part and for amendment of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags) in so far as it concerns Stempher BV and Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher CV;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 311/32

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2011 — Lucite International and Lucite International UK v Commission

(Case T-216/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for methacrylates - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Fines - Gravity of the infringement - Attenuating circumstances - Non-implementation in practice of the offending agreements or practices)

2011/C 311/55

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Lucite International Ltd (Southampton, United Kingdom); and Lucite International UK Ltd (Darwen, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Thompson QC, S. Rose and A. Chandler, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by V. Bottka, F. Amato and I. Chatzigiannis, and subsequently by V. Bottka, I. Chatzigiannis and F. Arbault, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicants under Article 2(d) of Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.645 — Methacrylates).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Dismisses the Commission’s request for withdrawal of immunity;

3. Orders Lucite International Ltd and Lucite International UK Ltd to bear 90 % of their own costs and to pay 90 % of the costs incurred by the Commission;

4. Orders the Commission to bear 10 % of its own costs and to pay 10 % of the costs incurred by Lucite International and Lucite International UK.

(1) OJ C 237, 30.9.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 355/14

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2012 — Nynäs Petroleum and Nynas Belgium v Commission

(Case T-347/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Netherlands market in road pavement bitumen - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Imputability of the unlawful conduct - Fines - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Significant added value - Equal treatment)

2012/C 355/25

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Nynäs Petroleum AB (Stockholm, Sweden) and Nynas Belgium AB (Stockholm) (represented by: A. Howard, Barrister, M. Dean and D. McGowan, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, Agent, and by L. Gyselen, lawyer)

Re:

APPLICATION, principally, for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 4090 final of 13 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.456 — Bitumen (Netherlands)) and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nynäs Petroleum AB and Nynas Belgium AB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 20, 27.1.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 118/22

Judgment of the General Court of 6 March 2012 — FLS Plast v Commission

(Case T-64/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Duration of the infringement - Fines - Gravity of the infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Proportionality - Joint and several liability - Principle of ne bis in idem)

2012/C 118/35

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: FLS Plast A/S (Valby, Denmark) (represented initially by: K. Lasok QC and subsequently by M. Thill-Tayara, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, Agent, and by M. Gray, Barrister)

Re:

Application for the partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags) and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags) in so far as it holds FLS Plast A/S liable for the single and continuous infringement referred to in Article 1(1) thereof, for the period from 31 December 1990 to 31 December 1991;

2. Sets the amount for payment of which FLS Plast is held jointly and severally liable under Article 2(f) of Decision C(2005) 4634 at EUR 14.45 million;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders the European Commission and FLS Plast each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.