ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 24/47

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 November 2009 — Esber v OHIM — Coloris Global Coloring Concept (COLORIS)

(Case T-353/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark COLORIS - Earlier national word mark COLORIS - Relative ground for refusal - Genuine use of the earlier trade mark - Article 15(2)(a) and Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 15(1)(a) and Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2010/C 24/81

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Esber, SA (Burceña-Baracaldo, Spain) (represented by: T. Villate Consonni, J. Calderón Chavero and M. Yañez Manglano, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Coloris Global Coloring Concept (Villeneuve Loubet, France) (represented by: K. Manhaeve, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 June 2007 (Case R 1060/2006-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Coloris Global Coloring Concept and Esber, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Esber, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/41

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Netherlands v Commission

(Case T-55/07) (1)

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Rural development support - Transitional measures - Concept of ‘multi-annual expenditure’ - Article 4(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 2603/1999)

2009/C 282/77

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: initially H. Sevenster and M. de Grave, subsequently M. de Grave, C. Wissels and M. Noort, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: T. van Rijn and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2006/932/EC of 14 December 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 2006 L 355, p. 96) in so far as it relates to the Kingdom of the Netherlands and more particularly with regard to the financial correction applied to the reimbursement of ineligible expenditure in the framework of the EAGGF, Guarantee Section, for the year 2002 in the amount of EUR 5.67 million.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 14.04.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 148/26

Judgment of the General Court of 15 April 2010 — Cabel Hall Citrus v OHIM — Casur (EGLÉFRUIT)

(Case T-488/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark EGLÉFRUIT - Earlier Community word mark UGLI and earlier national figurative mark ‘UGLI Fruit - but the affliction is only skin deep’ - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2010/C 148/46

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Cabel Hall Citrus Ltd (George Town, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands) (represented by: C. Rogers, barrister)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: D. Botis, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Casur S. Coop. Andaluza (Viator, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 19 September 2007 (Case R 293/2007-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Cabel Hall Citrus Ltd and Casur S.C. Andaluza.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders Cabel Hall Citrus Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 80/23

Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2010 — O2 (Germany) v OHIM (Homezone)

(Case T-344/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark Homezone - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2010/C 80/40

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: O2 (Germany) GmbH & Co. OHG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Fottner and M. Müller, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 July 2007 (Case R 1583/2006-4), concerning an application to register the word sign Homezone as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 5 July 2007 (Case R 1583/2006-4);

2. Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/9

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2010 — Systran and Systran Luxembourg v Commission

(Case T-19/07) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Call for tenders to carry out a project relating to the maintenance and linguistic enhancement of the Commission's machine translation system - Source codes for a computer program being marketed - Infringement of copyright - Unauthorised disclosure of know-how - Action for compensation - Non-contractual dispute - Admissibility - Actual and certain damage - Causal link - Flat-rate assessment of the amount of the damage)

2011/C 38/12

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Systran SA (Paris, France); and Systran Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: J.-P. Spitzer and E. De Boissieu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by E. Montaguti and M.F. Benyon, and subsequently by E. Traversa and E. Montaguti, Agents, and A. Berenboom and M. Isgour, lawyers)

Re:

Action for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of infringements committed following a call for tenders by the Commission relating to the maintenance and linguistic enhancement of its machine translation system.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the European Commission to pay Systran SA flat-rate compensation of EUR 12 001 000;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/24

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 — Italy v Commission

(Joined Cases T-166/07 and T-285/07) (1)

(Rules on the use of languages - Notice of open competitions for the recruitment of administrators and assistants - Publication in three official languages - Amendments - Publication in all the official languages - Choice of the second language from three languages - Regulation No 1 - Articles 27, 28 and 29(1) of the Staff Regulations - Article 1(1) and (2) of Annex III to the Staff Regulations - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of non-discrimination - Misuse of power)

2010/C 301/38

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (in Case T-166/07 represented by P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato, and in Case T-285/07, represented initially by P. Gentili and I. Braguglia, Agent, and subsequently by P. Gentili and R. Adam, Agent, and finally by P. Gentili and I. Bruni, Agent)

Defendant: European Commission (in Case T-166/07, represented initially by J. Currall, H. Krämer and M. Velardo, Agents, and subsequently by J. Currall and I. Baquero Cruz, Agent, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer, and in Case T-285/07, represented initially by J. Currall and A. Aresu, Agent, and subsequently by J. Currall and I. Baquero Cruz, assisted by A. Dal Ferro)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Republic of Lithuania (in Case T-166/07 represented by D. Kriaučiūnas, Agent), and Hellenic Republic (in Case T-285/07 represented by S. Vodina and M. Michelogiannaki, Agents)

Re:

Application for the annulment of Notice of Open Competition EPSO/AD/94/07 for the drawing up of a reserve list for the recruitment of Administrators (AD 5) in the field of information, communication and the media (OJ 2007 C 45 A, p. 3) and Notice of Open Competition EPSO/AST/37/07 for the drawing up of a reserve list for the recruitment of Assistants (AST 3) in the field of communication and information (OJ 2007 C 45 A, p. 15), and Notice of Open Competition EPSO/AD/95/07 for the drawing up of a reserve list for the recruitment of Administrators (AD 5) in the field of information science (library/documentation) (OJ 2007 C 103 A, p. 7).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

3. Orders the Republic of Lithuania and the Hellenic Republic to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 7.7.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/30

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2011 — Hitachi and Others v Commission

(Case T-112/07) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in gas insulated switchgear projects - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Market-sharing - Rights of the defence - Proof of the infringement - Single and continuous infringement - Fines - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Deterrent effect - Cooperation)

2011/C 252/70

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Hitachi Ltd (Tokyo, Japan); Hitachi Europe Ltd (Maidenhead, United Kingdom); and Japan AE Power Systems Corp. (Tokyo) (represented by: M. Reynolds, P. Mansfield and B. Roy, Solicitors, D. Arts, lawyer, N. Green QC, and S. Singla, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially F. Arbault, then X. Lewis, and subsequently P. Van Nuffel and J. Bourke, and finally P. Van Nuffel, N. Khan and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents, assisted by J. Holmes, Barrister)

Re:

APPLICATION, primarily, for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 6762 final of 24 January 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.899 — Gas insulated switchgear) to the extent to which it concerns the applicants and annulment of the fines imposed on them and, in the alternative, for the annulment of Article 2 of that decision to the extent to which it concerns the applicants and, in the further alternative, for the annulment or a reduction of the fines imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the applicants to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 139/16

Judgment of the General Court of 22 March 2011 — Ford Motor v OHIM

(Case T-486/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative Community trade mark CA - Earlier Community word and figurative marks KA - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2011/C 139/30

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ford Motor Company (Dearborn, Michigan, United States) (represented by: R. Ingerl, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Alkar Automotive, SA (Derio, Spain) (represented by: S. Alsonso Maruri, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Chamber of the Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 October 2007 (Case R 85/2006-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ford Motor Company and Alkar Automotive, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ford Motor Company to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 51, 23.2.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 347/27

Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2011 — Dimos Peramatos v Commission

(Case T-312/07) (1)

(Financial contribution granted for an environmental project - LIFE - Decision to recover in part the amount paid out - Determination of the obligations of the recipient undertaken in the financed project - Legitimate expectations - Obligation to state reasons)

2011/C 347/40

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Dimos Peramatos (Perama, Greece) (represented by: G. Gerapetritis and P. Petropoulos, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Condou-Durande and A.-M. Rouchaud-Joët, Agents, assisted by A. Somou, lawyer)

Re:

Action for annulment or, in the alternative, amendment of Decision E(2005) 5361 of the Commission of 7 December 2005 relating to Debit Note No 3240504536 which was issued to the Dimos Peramatos (Municipality of Perama) to recover the financial contribution which had been paid by the Commission in the context of the subsidy granted to the Dimos Peramatos by Commission Decision C(97)/1997/29 final of 17 July 1997.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders Dimos Peratamos to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, including the costs relating to interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/15

Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2012 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v EFSA

(Case T-457/07) (1)

(Public procurement - Tender procedure - Provision of IT consultancy assistance services - Rejection of a tender and decision to award the contract to another tenderer - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Selection criteria - Award criteria - Compliance with award criteria laid down in the tender specifications - Manifest error of assessment)

2013/C 32/20

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (represented initially by A. Cuvillier, subsequently by S. Gabbi and D. Detken, and finally by D. Detken, acting as Agents, assisted by J. Stuyck and A.-M. Vandromme, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of EFSA of 1 October 2007 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in response to Call for Tenders EFSA/IT/2007/14 for IT Consultancy Assistance (OJ 2007/S 97-118626) and awarding the contract to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) rejecting the tender submitted by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE in response to Call for Tenders EFSA/IT/2007/14 for IT Consultancy Assistance and awarding the contract to another tenderer;

2. Orders EFSA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 51, 23.2.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 138/11

Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2012 — Poland v Commission

(Case T-243/07) (1)

(Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Measures to be adopted as a result of the accession of new Member States - 2003 Act of Accession - Determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar, and the financial consequences of their elimination - Objective pursued by a provision of primary law - Decision 2007/361/EC)

2012/C 138/17

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented: initially by E. Ośniecka-Tamecka, subsequently by T. Nowakowski, then by M. Dowgielewicz, and lastly by M. Szpunar, B. Majczyna and D. Krawczyk, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas and R. Krasuckaitė, acting as Agents); and Slovak Republic (represented: initially by J. Čorba, and subsequently by B. Ricziová and M. Kianička, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/361/EC of 4 May 2007 on the determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar and the financial consequences of their elimination in relation to the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (OJ 2007 L 138, p. 14), in so far as it relates to the Republic of Poland

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision 2007/361/EC of 4 May 2007 on the determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar and the financial consequences of their elimination in relation to the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, in so far as it relates to the Republic of Poland;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Republic of Poland;

3. Orders the Slovak Republic and the Republic of Lithuania to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 8.9.2007.
Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2019 — Italia and Eurallumina v Commission

(Joined Cases T-119/07 and T-207/07) (1)

(State aid - Directive 2003/96/EC - Excise duties on mineral oils - Mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production - Exemption from excise duty - Selective nature - Guidelines on national regional aid - Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection of 2001 - Legitimate expectations - Presumption of legality attaching to measures of the institutions - Principle of sound administration - Obligation to state reasons - Contradictory reasoning)

(2019/C 399/43)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant in Case T-119/07: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and G. Aiello and P. Garofoli, avvocati dello Stato)

Applicant in Case T-207/07: Eurallumina SpA (Portoscuso, Italy) (represented by: initially, L. Martin Alegi, R. Denton and E. Cormack, and, subsequently, L. Martin Alegi, R. Denton, A. Stratakis and L. Philippou, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: in Case T-119/07, V. Di Bucci, N. Khan, G. Conte and K. Walkerová, acting as Agents, and, in Case T 207/07, initially, V. Di Bucci, N. Khan, G. Conte and K. Walkerová, and, subsequently, N. Khan and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Applications pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment, in whole or in part, of Commission Decision 2007/375/EC of 7 February 2007 concerning the exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production in Gardanne, in the Shannon region and in Sardinia implemented by France, Ireland and Italy respectively (C 78/2001 (ex NN 22/01), C 79/2001 (ex NN 23/01), C 80/2001 (ex NN 26/01)) (OJ 2007 L 147, p. 29), in so far as it finds that State aid was granted by the Italian Republic, from 1 January 2004, on the basis of the exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production in Sardinia (Italy), and in so far as it orders the Italian Republic to recover the aid or to cancel or suspend its payment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs in Case T-119/07;

3. Orders Eurallumina SpA to pay the costs in Case T-207/07.

(1) OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 325/19

Judgment of the General Court of 16 September 2013 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-2/07) (1)

(Cohesion fund - Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 - Projects concerning the clearance of the hydrographical basin of Júcar (Spain) - Partial withdrawal of financial assistance - Public works contracts - Award criteria - Economically most advantageous tender - Equal treatment - Transparency - Eligibility of expenditure - Determination of the financial corrections - Article H(2) of Annex II of Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 - Proportionality)

2013/C 325/31

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented: initially by J. M. Rodríguez Cárcamo, then A. Rubio González, lawyers in the State legal service)

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by A. Steiblytė and L. Escobar Guerrero, Agents, and M. Canal Fontcuberta, lawyer, then A. Steiblytė and S. Pardo Quintillán, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 5102 of 20 October 2006, reducing the financial assistance from the Cohesion Fund to the group of projects bearing the reference 2001.ES.16.C.PE.050 and concerning the clearance of the hydrographical basin of Júcar (Spain).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/48

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 11 June 2009 — Hedgefund Intelligence v OHIM — Hedge Invest (InvestHedge)

(Case T-67/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark InvestHedge - Earlier Community figurative mark HEDGE INVEST - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2009/C 180/88

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hedgefund Intelligence Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Reed, Barrister, and G. Crofton Martin, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Hedge Invest SpA (Milan, Italy)

Re:

Action against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2007 (Case R 148/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Hedge Invest SpA and Hedgefund Intelligence Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hedgefund Intelligence Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.
1.

Orders Cooperação e Desenvolvimento Regional, SA to reimburse to the Commission of the European Communities the sum of EUR 63 349,27, together with late-payment interest: — at the rate of 6.29 % per annum from 31 January 2001 to the date of the present judgment; — at the annual rate applied under Irish law, that is to say, currently Article 26 of the Debtors (Ireland) Act 1840, as amended, up to the rate of 6.29 % per annum from the date of the present judgment to full clearance of the debt;