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

Judgment of the General Court of 17 November 2021 — Société des produits Nestlé v EUIPO — Amigüitos pets & life (THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect)

(Case T-616/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect - Earlier EU word mark ONE - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Decision taken following the annulment of an earlier decision by the General Court - Article 72(6) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Res judicata)

(2022/C 24/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz and C. Elkemann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Amigüitos pets & life, SA (Lorca, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 July 2020 (Case R 424/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Société des produits Nestlé and Amigüitos pets & life.

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 29 July 2020 (Case R 424/2020-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Société des produits Nestlé SA for the purposes of the proceedings before the General Court;

3. Orders Amigüitos pets & life, SA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 23.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Sanford v EUIPO — Avery Zweckform (Labels)

(Case T-443/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a label - Earlier design - Proof of disclosure - Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Evidence submitted after the expiry of the prescribed time limit - Board of Appeal’s discretion - Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)

(2022/C 2/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sanford LP (Atlanta, Georgia, United States) (represented by: J. Zecher, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Avery Zweckform GmbH (Oberlaindern/Valley, Germany) (represented by: H. Förster, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2020 (Case R 2413/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Avery Zweckform and Sanford.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sanford LP to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — HB v EIB

(Case T-689/20) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Dismissal - Manifest error of assessment - Principle of sound administration - Lack of competence of the author of the act)

(2022/C 73/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: HB (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: G. Faedo and K. Carr, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking annulment of the decision of the EIB of 27 April 2020 terminating the applicant’s employment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders HB to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Investment Bank (EIB).

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 1 December 2021 — KY v Court of Justice of the European Union

(Case T-433/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Pension rights acquired before entry into the service of the EU - Transfer to the EU scheme - Crediting of additional pensionable years - Restitution of the amount of pension rights not taken into account in the EU’s pension annuity scheme - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - The ‘minimum subsistence figure’ rule - Unjust enrichment)

(2022/C 37/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: KY (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: J. Inghelram and A. Ysebaert, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the implied decision, confirmed by the express decision of 10 October 2019, rejecting the request for restitution of the non-subsidised part of the pension rights acquired by the applicant before she took up her duties and transferred to the pension scheme of the institutions of the European Union.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders KY to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2022 — Unger Marketing International v EUIPO — Orben Wasseraufbereitung (Water purifiers)

(Case T-325/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Design representing a water purifier - Ground for invalidity - Non-compliance with requirements for protection - Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function - Article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002 - Declaration of invalidity)

(2022/C 119/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Unger Marketing International, LLC (Bridgeport, Connecticut, United States) (represented by: C. Schulte, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Orben Wasseraufbereitung GmbH & Co. KG

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 February 2020 (Case R 740/2018-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Orben Wasseraufbereitung and Unger Marketing International.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Unger Marketing International, LLC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — KS v Frontex

(Case T-409/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Termination of the contract - Breakdown in the relationship of trust - Article 47(b)(ii) of the CEOS - Right to be heard - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Requests for assistance and compensation - Action for annulment and compensation)

(2022/C 84/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: KS (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Border and Coast Guard Agency (represented by: H. Caniard, S. Drew, W. Szmidt and B. Dukay-Zangrando, acting as Agents, and by T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and L. Burguin, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of Frontex’s decision of 30 August 2019 terminating the applicant’s fixed-term contract of employment and of the decision of 13 February 2020 rejecting the applicant’s requests for assistance and compensation and, second, compensation for the non-material damage which the applicant has suffered as a result.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) of 13 February 2020 in so far as it rejected KS’s request for assistance;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders KS to bear half of his own costs;

4. Orders Frontex to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by KS.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2022 — Kühne v Parliament

(Case T-468/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Policy of Parliament staff mobility - Reassignment in the interest of the service)

(2022/C 198/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Verena Kühne (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: O. Schmechel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Darie and B. Schäfer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the Parliament’s decision of 2 July 2020 reassigning the applicant to the Liaison Office in Luxembourg (Luxembourg).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mrs Verena Kühne to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 304, 14.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2022 — Diego v EUIPO — Forbo Financial Services (WOOD STEP LAMINATE FLOORING)

(Case T-498/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark WOOD STEP LAMINATE FLOORING - Earlier international word mark STEP - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Free movement of goods)

(2022/C 128/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Diego Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Kft. (Dabas, Hungary) (represented by: P. Jalsovszky, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Forbo Financial Services AG (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: F. Kramer, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 June 2020 (Case R 1630/2019-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Forbo Financial Services and Diego Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Diego Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Kft. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 339, 12.10.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2022 — MF v eu-LISA

(Case T-568/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Post occupied requiring security clearance - Clearance refused by the national security authority - Termination of the contract - No request for a hearing - Right to be heard within the meaning of Article 11(5)(b) of Decision 2015/444)

(2022/C 244/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (represented by: M. Chiodi, acting as Agent, and by A. Duron and D. Waelbroeck, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 4 September 2020, the applicant seeks annulment, first, of the decision of the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) of 29 October 2019 terminating his employment contract and, second, to the extent necessary, of the decision of eu-LISA of 26 May 2020 rejecting his complaint of 29 January 2020.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders MF to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 23.11.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — D & A Pharma v Commission and EMA

(Case T-556/20) (1)

(Medicinal products for human use - Application for conditional marketing authorisation for the medicinal product Hopveus — sodium oxybate - Decision of refusal by the Commission - Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 - Procedure - Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use - Request for consultation of a specific scientific advisory group - Impartiality of members of an ad hoc committee of experts - Manifest errors of assessment - Equal treatment)

(2022/C 198/51)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Debregeas et associés Pharma (D & A Pharma) (Paris, France) (represented by: N. Viguié and D. Krzisch, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: G. Wils and A. Sipos, acting as Agents), European Medicines Agency (represented by: S. Marino, S. Drosos, C. Bortoluzzi and H. Kerr, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the Commission’s Implementing Decision of 6 July 2020 refusing marketing authorisation for Hopveus — sodium oxybate, a medicinal product for human use, under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (OJ 2004 L 136, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Debregeas et associés Pharma (D & A Pharma) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 3.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2022 — Deutschtec v EUIPO — Group A (HOLUX)

(Case T-738/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark HOLUX - Earlier international registration in respect of the word mark HOLUX - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 294/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Deutschtec GmbH (Petershagen/Eggersdorf, Germany) (represented by: R. Arnade, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Group A NV (Hasselt, Belgium)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 October 2020 (Case R 223/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Deutschtec GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2022 — Tirrenia di navigazione v Commission

(Case T-601/20) (1)

(State aid - Maritime transport - Service of general economic interest - Aid granted to Adriatica for the period from January 1992 to July 1994 in relation to the Brindisi/Corfu/Igoumenitsa/Patras connection - Decision declaring the aid unlawful - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Interest accrued - Limitation period - New aid - Incompatibility with the internal market - Effects of a cartel on the market - Excessive duration of the procedure - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty - Principle of good administration)

(2022/C 284/32)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Tirrenia di navigazione SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: B. Nascimbene and F. Rossi Dal Pozzo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2020/1411 of 2 March 2022 on the State aid No C 64/99 (ex NN 8/99) implemented by Italy for the Adriatica, Caremar, Siremar, Saremar and Toremar shipping companies (Tirrenia Group) in so far as it concerns it.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tirrenia di navigazione SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 378, 9.11.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — WT v Commission

(Case T-91/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary penalty in the form of a reprimand - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Principle of good administration - Right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Reasonable time - Psychological harassment - Principle of legal certainty - Material and non-material damage)

(2022/C 418/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: WT (represented by: V. Villante, D. Rovetta and D. Birkenmaier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A.-C. Simon and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 17 April 2019 by which the Commission imposed on her a disciplinary penalty in the form of a reprimand and, second, compensation for the non-material and material damage which she claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders WT to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — JP v Commission

(Case T-179/20) (1)

(Civil service - Open competition - Notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation (AD 7) - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Composition of the selection board - Stability - Manifest error of assessment - Liability)

(2022/C 340/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: JP (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Lilamand, D. Milanowska and A.-C. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 refused, after review, to include her name on the reserve list of successful candidates in that competition and, second, compensation for the damage which she claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders JP to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Ighoga Region 10 and Others v Commission

(Case T-582/20) (1)

(State aid - Construction of a hotel and congress centre in Ingolstadt - Decision finding no State aid - Procedural rights of interested parties - Failure to initiate formal investigation procedure - No serious difficulties)

(2023/C 7/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Interessengemeinschaft der Hoteliers und Gastronomen Region 10 e.V. (Ighoga Region 10) (Ingolstadt, Germany), MJ, MK (represented by: A. Bartosch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and K. Blanck, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller, acting as Agent)

Re:

By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek the annulment of Decision C(2020) 2623 final of the European Commission of 28 April 2020 declaring, at the end of the preliminary examination stage in State aid procedure SA. 48582 (2017/FC), that the measures referred to in the complaint brought on 4 July 2017 by Ighoga Region 10 and relating to the ongoing construction of the Ingolstadt Congress Centre (Germany) and a neighbouring hotel did not constitute State aid implemented by Germany in favour of the Maritim Group and KHI Immobilien GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Interessengemeinschaft der Hoteliers und Gastronomen Region 10 e.V. (Ighoga Region 10), MJ and MK to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2021 — QB v Commission

(Case T-71/21) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary staff - Remuneration - Expatriation allowance - Article 4(1)(a) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Refusal to grant the expatriation allowance - Main occupation - Work done for another State)

(2022/C 51/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: QB (represented by: R. Wardyn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and A.C. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Commission’s Office for the ‘Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements’ (PMO) of 6 April 2020 refusing to grant the expatriation allowance to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders QB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 148, 26.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Beta Sports (META)

(Case T-192/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark META - Earlier national word mark METALGIAL - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 171/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: T. González Martínez, lawyer)

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: Beta Sports LLC (Coconut Creek, Florida, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2021 (Case R 1152/2020-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Ern and Beta Sports.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2022 — CNH Industrial v EUIPO (SOILXPLORER)

(Case T-300/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark SOILXPLORER - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 119/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CNH Industrial NV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: L. Axel Karnøe Søndergaard, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 March 2021 (Case R 386/2021-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign SOILXPLORER as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders CNH Industrial NV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 297, 26.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — SFD v EUIPO — Allmax Nutrition (ALLNUTRITION DESIGNED FOR MOTIVATION)

(Case T-35/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ALLNUTRITION DESIGNED FOR MOTIVATION - Earlier EU word marks ALLMAX NUTRITION - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 207/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: SFD S.A. (Opole, Poland) (represented by: T. Grucelski, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Allmax Nutrition Inc. (North York, Ontario, Canada)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 October 2020 (Case R 511/2020-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Allmax Nutrition and SFD.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SFD S.A. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 98, 22.3.2021.