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

Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik v EUIPO — Schuju (Хозяйка)

(Case T-185/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Хозяйка - Earlier national figurative mark хозяюшка - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 171/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik GmbH (Bühl, Germany) (represented by: A. Lingenfelser, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Peter Schuju (Borchen, Germany) (represented by: K. Borstel, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 November 2020 (Case R 2717/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mr Schuju and Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Lackmann Fleisch- und Feinkostfabrik GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 January 2022 — Neolith Distribution v EUIPO (Representation of an ornamental pattern)

(Case T-259/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for an EU pattern mark - Representation of an ornamental pattern - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 119/53)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Neolith Distribution, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 March 2021 (Case R 2155/2020-4), regarding an application for registration of a pattern sign representing an ornamental pattern as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Neolith Distribution, SL, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 252, 28.6.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — Numbi v Council

(Case T-112/21) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territories of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures)

(2022/C 244/44)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.-C. Cadilhac and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2020 L 419, p. 30) and, second, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2020 L 419, p. 5), in so far as those acts concern him.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr John Numbi to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background IV)

(Case T-279/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark - Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background IV - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 213/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Siebertz, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1898/2020-5) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing three-pointed stars on a black background IV as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Daimler AG to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 11 May 2022 — Creaticon v EUIPO — Paul Hartmann (SK SKINTEGRA THE RARE MOLECULE)

(Case T-93/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - EU figurative mark SK SKINTEGRA THE RARE MOLECULE - Earlier national word mark SKINTEGRITY - 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 266/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Creaticon d.o.o. (Zagreb, Croatia) (represented by: P. Krmpotić, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Paul Hartmann AG (Heidenheim, Germany)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and modification of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 December 2020 (Case R 847/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Creaticon d.o.o. to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2022 — Funline International v EUIPO (AMSTERDAM POPPERS)

(Case T-680/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark AMSTERDAM POPPERS - Absolute ground for refusal - Trade mark contrary to public policy - Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 244/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Funline International (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: Y. Echevarría García, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and modification of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 20 August 2021 (Case R 439/2021-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Funline International to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 502, 13.12.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Beveland v EUIPO — Super B (BUCANERO)

(Case T-29/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark BUCANERO - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 18(1), second subparagraph, point (a) and Article 58(1) point (a) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character of the mark - Proof of genuine use)

(2022/C 303/49)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Beveland, SA (Sant Joan les Fonts, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Super B, SL (Talavera de la Reina, Spain) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 November 2020 (Case R 1046/2020-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Beveland and Super B.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Beveland, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 79, 8.3.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2022 — Medela v EUIPO (MAXFLOW)

(Case T-744/21) (1)

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

(2022/C 294/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Medela Holding AG (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Hartmann and S. Fröhlich, lawyers)

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

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 30 August 2021 (Case R 876/2021-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Medela Holding AG to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — Brand Energy Holdings v EUIPO (RAPIDGUARD)

(Case T-573/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark RAPIDGUARD - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Right to be heard)

(2022/C 359/84)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Brand Energy Holdings BV (Vlaardingen, Netherlands) (represented by: A. Hönninger and F. Dechent, lawyers)

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 of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 June 2021 (Case R 294/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Brand Energy Holdings BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 431, 25.10.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — VI v Commission

(Case T-20/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Open Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Equal treatment - Stability in the composition of the selection board)

(2022/C 340/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

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

Re:

By her action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of, first, the decision of the selection board for Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 not to include her on the competition reserve list, second, the decision of that selection board to refuse the applicant’s request for review of the initial decision, third, the Commission’s decision of 20 August 2019 rejecting her complaint, fourth, the notice of Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 of 11 October 2018 organised for the purpose of drawing up two reserve lists from which the Commission would recruit administrators (AD 7) in the fields of customs and taxation and, fifth, the competition reserve list, as well as, moreover, seeking compensation for the damage which she claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision, adopted after review, of the selection board for Open Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 of 27 February 2020 not to include VI’s name on the reserve list for that competition;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła v Commission

(Case T-123/21) (1)

(Environment - Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 - Fluorinated greenhouse gases - Placement on the market - Release for fee circulation - Electronic registry for quotas for placing hydrofluorocarbons on the market - Decision to register - Authorisation to use a quota)

(2022/C 418/29)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: A. Galos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Sanfrutos Cano and M. Rynkowski, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 15 December 2020 to enter the reduction of its quotas pursuant to Article 25(2) of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on fluorinated greenhouse gases and repealing Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 (OJ 2014 L 150, p. 195) in the electronic registry for quotas for placing hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) on the market.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Stowarzyszenie chłodnictwa klimatyzacji i pomp ciepła to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 148, 26.4.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Łosowski v EUIPO — Skawiński (KOMBI)

(Case T-730/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark KOMBI - Earlier EU word mark kombii - Relative ground for invalidity - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Reliance on an individual right to use the name ‘kombi’ under national law)

(2022/C 418/45)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Sławomir Łosowski (Gdańsk, Poland) (represented by: K. Czub, 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, intervener before the General Court: Grzegorz Skawiński (Sopot, Poland) (represented by: J. Aftyka, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 September 2021 (Case R 381/2017-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Sławomir Łowoski to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 24, 17.1.2022.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — Vasallo Andrés v Parliament

(Case T-496/21) (1)

(Institutional law - Petitions Committee of the Parliament - Petition concerning the disciplinary regime for public employees in Spain - Question not coming within the scope of activity of the European Union - Obligation to state reasons - Conflict of interest - Effect of posting the status of a petition on the Parliament’s Internet petitions portal)

(2022/C 463/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Ángel Vasallo Andrés (Valladolid, Spain) (represented by: F. J. González Álvarez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: P. López-Carceller and I. Liukkonen, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Decision D 200663 of the Petitions Committee of the European Parliament, adopted on 17 May 2021 and notified on 8 June 2021, declaring inadmissible his petition (No 99/2021) concerning the disciplinary regime for public employees in Spain.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Ángel Vasallo Andrés to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Privatbrauerei Eichbaum v EUIPO — Anchor Brewing Company (STEAM)

(Case T-609/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark STEAM - Genuine use of the mark - Nature of use - Article 18(1), second subparagraph, heading (a), and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 432/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Privatbrauerei Eichbaum GmbH & Co. KG (Mannheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Schmidhuber and E. Levenson, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Anchor Brewing Company LLC (San Francisco, California, United States) (represented by: I. Kuschel and W. von der Osten-Sacken, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Privatbrauerei Eichbaum GmbH Co. KG, seeks partial annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 July 2021 (Case R 780/2020-2), relating to revocation proceedings between the applicant and the intervener.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Privatbrauerei Eichbaum GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — Paesen v EEAS

(Case T-88/21) (1)

(Civil service - Official - EEAS staff posted to a third country - Head of delegation - Management trial period - Final assessment report of the management trial period - Act not adversely affecting an official - Inadmissibility - Re-assignment to a non-managerial post at EEAS headquarters - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Conditions for the application of Article 11 of Commission Decision C (2008) 5028/2 of 9 September 2008 on middle management staff to heads of delegation - Failure to include documents in the personal file - Interests of the service - Misuse of powers - Request for assistance - Decision rejecting the request - Liability)

(2022/C 463/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Sandra Paesen (Beersel, Belgium) (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and R. Spáč, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of (i) the final assessment report of her management trial period, (ii) the decision of the European External Action Service (EEAS) dated 10 April 2020 re-assigning her to a non-managerial post and (iii) the decision of the EEAS dated 12 May 2020 rejecting her request for assistance, second, compensation for the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by her.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Sandra Paesen to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — Aldi Einkauf v EUIPO — Cantina sociale Tollo (ALDIANO)

(Case T-429/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark ALDIANO - Earlier EU word marks and earlier international word registration ALDI - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 64 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 463/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aldi Einkauf SE & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: C. Fürsen, M. Minkner and A. Starcke, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Cantina sociale Tollo SCA (Tollo, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica, F. Fischetti and F. De Bono, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 May 2021 (Case R 1074/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 May 2021 (Case R 1074/2020-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Aldi Einkauf SE & Co. OHG;

3. Orders Cantina sociale Tollo SCA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 357, 6.9.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2022 — Siremar v Commission

(Case T-668/21) (1)

(State aid - Maritime transport - Rescue aid - Decision declaring the aid unlawful - Decision declaring the aid in part compatible and in part incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Service of general economic interest - Obligation to submit a restructuring or liquidation plan - Six-month time limit - Extension - Tax exemption - Advantage - Effect on trade between Member States - Adverse effect on competition - Length of proceedings - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty - Principle of sound administration)

(2023/C 7/38)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Sicilia Regionale Marittima SpA — Siremar (Rome, Italy) (represented by: B. Nascimbene, F. Rossi Dal Pozzo and A. Moriconi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz, C.-M. Carrega and D. Recchia, Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2021) 4268 final of 17 June 2021 on the measures SA.32014, SA.32015, SA.32016 (2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Italy for Siremar and its acquirer Società Navigazione Siciliana (SNS).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sicilia Regionale Marittima SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — Múka v Commission

(Case T-214/21) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to State aid control procedures - Refusal to grant access - Third indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - General presumption of non-disclosure - Overriding public interest)

(2022/C 472/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ondřej Múka (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: P. Kočí, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant asks the General Court, first, to annul (i) the letter of the European Commission of 27 October 2020 rejecting his initial application of 17 September 2020 requesting access to documents which it had exchanged with the Czech Republic and (ii) Decision C(2021) 1320 final of 21 February 2021 rejecting his confirmatory application of 12 November 2020 requesting access to those documents, and, second, to order the Commission to provide him with all the documents and information referred to in his application of 17 September 2020.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Ondřej Múka to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.