ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the General Court of 11 June 2020 — VDV eTicket Service v Commission and INEA

(Case T-516/19) (1)

(Arbitration clause - ‘Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) - Project ‘European Travellers Club: Account-Based Travelling across the European Union — ETC’ - Grant agreement - Decision of INEA declaring ineligible certain costs incurred in the context of subcontracts - Misidentification of the defendant - Measure which is part of a purely contractual context from which it is inseparable - Legitimate expectations - Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2020/C 262/33)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: VDV eTicket Service GmbH & Co. KG (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: A. Bartosch, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: R. Pethke and M. Siekierzyńska, acting as Agents), Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (represented by: I. Ramallo and P. Rosa Plaza, acting as Agents, and R. van der Hout and C. Wagner, lawyers)

Re:

First, application under Article 272 TFEU seeking a declaration that INEA’s failure to acknowledge, in its letter Ares(2019)3151305 of 13 May 2019, costs in the amount of EUR 407 443,04 in the context of the Horizon 2020 programme, is unlawful, and second and in the alternative, application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of that letter in so far as it declared ineligible the costs in that amount.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed in part as inadmissible and in part as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

2. VDV eTicket Service GmbH & Co. KG shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 319, 23.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 24 July 2020 — VG v Commission

(Case T-299/19) (1)

(2020/C 371/34)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 230, 8.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Bontempi and Others v Sand Cph (WhiteSand)

(Case T-350/19) (1)

(2020/C 348/39)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 255, 29.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 4 December 2020 — Agepha Pharma v EUIPO — Apogepha Arzneimittel (AGEPHA)

(Case T-792/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 35/66)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Agepha Pharma s.r.o. (Senec, Slovakia) (represented by: D. Göbel, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Apogepha Arzneimittel GmbH (Dresden, Germany) (represented by: A. Marx and R. Kaase, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 August 2019 (Case R 386/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Apogepha Arzneimittel GmbH and Agepha Pharma s.r.o.

Operative part of the order

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

2. Agepha Pharma s.r.o and Apogepha Arzneimittel GmbH shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 6 October 2020 — Cipriani v EUIPO — Hotel Cipriani (ARRIGO CIPRIANI)

(Case T-325/19) (1)

(2021/C 9/47)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 4 May 2021 — Asoliva and Anierac v Commission

(Case T-822/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Agriculture - Classification into one of three categories of virgin olive oil - Implementing measures - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 252/33)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Asociación Española de la Industria y Comercio Exportador de Aceite de Oliva (Asoliva) (Madrid, Spain), Asociación Nacional de Industriales Envasadores y Refinadores de Aceites Comestibles (Anierac) (Madrid) (represented by V. Rodríguez Fuentes, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Konstantinidis, F. Castilla Contreras and M. Morales Puerta, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Article 1(1)(b) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1604 of 27 September 2019 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2568/91 on the characteristics of olive oil and olive-residue oil and on the relevant methods of analysis (OJ 2019 L 250, p. 14).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Asociación Española de la Industria y Comercio Exportador de Aceite de Oliva (Asoliva) et Asociación Nacional de Industriales Envasadores y Refinadores de Aceites Comestibles (Anierac) shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 27, 27.1.2020.
Order of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Junqueras i Vies v Parliament

(Case T-734/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Institutional law - Member of Parliament - Privileges and immunities - Request for an urgent initiative to confirm the immunity of a Member of the European Parliament - Act not open to challenge - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 88/41)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Oriol Junqueras i Vies (Sant Joan de Vilatorrada, Spain) (represented by: A. Van den Eynde Adroer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: F. Drexler, N. Görlitz and C. Burgos, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the letter of 22 August 2019 by which the President of the Parliament rejected the request to take an urgent initiative seeking to confirm the applicant’s immunity, made on 4 July 2019 on his behalf by Ms Riba i Giner, Member of the European Parliament, on the basis of Article 8 of the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Rules that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the Kingdom of Spain’s application to intervene;

3. Orders Mr Oriol Junqueras i Vies to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Parliament;

4. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its costs relating to its application to intervene.

(1) OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 20 October 2021 — AstraZeneca and Others v Commission

(Case T-476/19) (1)

(2021/C 513/52)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 7 September 2021 — BT Group and Communications Global Network Services v Commission

(Case T-482/19) (1)

(2021/C 452/61)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 5 December 2022 — W.S. Atkins International v Commission

(Case T-758/19) (1)

(2023/C 45/58)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 27, 27.1.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 1 June 2022 — Del Valle Ruiz and Others v SRB

(Case T-512/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Economic and monetary policy - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - Resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español - No ex post definitive valuation of Banco Popular Español - Lack of direct concern - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2022/C 284/40)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Antonio Del Valle Ruiz (Mexico City, Mexico) and the 36 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the order (represented by: B. Fernández García, lawyer)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: J. King and E. Muratori, acting as Agents, assisted by H.-G. Kamann, F. Louis, C. Schwedler, P. Gey, V. Del Pozo Espinosa De Los Monteros, G. Barthet and J. Krämer, lawyers)

Re:

By their action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek annulment of the ‘decision of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) not to carry out an ex post definitive valuation of Banco Popular Español, SA, communicated to the applicants by letter of 20 May 2019’.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Mr Antonio Del Valle Ruíz and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex are ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 295, 2.9.2019.
Order of the President of the General Court of 8 June 2020 — Ascenza Agro v Commission

(Case T-77/20 R)

(Application for interim relief - Plant protection products - Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 - Implementing regulation (EU) 2020/17 - Non-renewal of approval of the active substance chlorpyriphos-methyl - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Lack of any urgency - Serious and irreparable damage - Absence)

(2020/C 255/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ascenza Agro, SA (Setúbal, Portugal) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, P. Sellar, lawyers, and G. McElwee, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, F. Castilla Contreras and I. Naglis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU, seeking suspension of the operation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/17 of 10 January 2020 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance chlorpyrifos-methyl, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2020 L 7, p. 11).

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
Order of the General Court of 16 October 2020 — Valiante v Commission

(Case T-13/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Civil Service - Officials - Internal competition COM/1/AD 10/18 (AD 10) - Submission of the application by means of the form provided for that purpose and referred to in Article 2 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations - Separate application to be admitted to the competition submitted at the same time to the appointing authority - Eligibility criteria - Selection board’s decision rejecting the applicant’s application - Appointing authority’s decision refusing the applicant’s request to disregard one of the conditions set out in the competition notice in order to admit him to the competition - Challenge to the appointing authority’s decision not that of the selection board - Legal interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 9/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Diego Valiante (Antwerp-Berchem, Belgium) (represented by: R. Wardyn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Milanowska and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision of 14 March 2019 by which that institution’s appointing authority rejected the applicant’s application to be admitted to the internal competition COM/1/AD 10/18 (AD 10), on the ground that he did not fulfil the condition set out in the related competition notice concerning the holding of grade AD 8.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Mr Diego Valiante shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 95, 23.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 8 September 2020 — KH v EEAS

(Case T-334/20) (1)

(2020/C 378/59)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 17 December 2020 — United Kingdom v Commission

(Case T-37/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - EAGF and EAFRD - Time limit for bringing an action - Starting point - Notification and publication - No excusable error - Out of time - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 62/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Brandon, acting as Agent, and by T. Buley, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina and A. Sauka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1835 of 30 October 2019 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2019 L 279, p. 98), in so far as it concerns certain expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications to intervene of the Czech Republic and the French Republic.

3. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

4. The Czech Republic and the French Republic shall bear their own costs relating to their applications to intervene.

(1) OJ C 95, 23.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 25 November 2020 — PL v Commission

(Case T-308/20) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Reassignment - Decision with retroactive effect adopted to comply with a judgment of the General Court - Article 266 TFEU - Article 22a of the Staff Regulations - Competent authority - Withdrawal of the contested measure - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 28/81)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: PL (represented by: J.-N. Louis and J. Van Rossum, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Brauhoff, I. Melo Sampaio and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 25 June 2019 concerning the reassignment of the applicant to the Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport with retroactive effect from 1 January 2013.

Operative part of the order

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

2. The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by PL.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 10 February 2021 — Close and Cegelec v Parliament

(Case T-188/20) (1)

(2021/C 138/71)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Bigben Connected v EUIPO — Forsee Power (FORCE POWER)

(Case T-478/20) (1)

(2021/C 88/64)

Language of the case: French

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

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

Order of the General Court of 23 April 2021 — Target Brands v EUIPO — The a.r.t. company b&s (art class)

(Case T-221/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Revocation of the contested decision - Disappearance of the subject matter of the proceedings - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 242/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Target Brands Inc. (Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: The a.r.t. company b&s, SA (Quel, Spain) (represented by: J. Villamor Muguerza, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2020 (Case R 1596/2019-5) relating to opposition proceedings between The a.r.t. company b&s and Target Brands.

Operative part of the order

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

2. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Target Brands Inc.

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 19 March 2021 — Indofil Industries (Netherlands) v Commission

(Case T-742/20 R)

(Application for interim relief - Plant protection products - Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2087 - Non-renewal of approval of the active substance mancozeb - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency)

(2021/C 182/74)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Indofil Industries (Netherlands) BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: C. Mereu and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, I. Naglis and G. Koleva, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for suspension of operation of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2087 of 14 December 2020 concerning the non-renewal of the approval of the active substance mancozeb, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2020 L 423, p. 50).

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim relief is dismissed.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 31 May 2021 — König Ludwig International v EUIPO (Royal Bavarian Beer)

(Case T-332/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark Royal Bavarian Beer - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Unitary character of the EU trade mark - Article 1(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2021/C 289/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: König Ludwig International GmbH & Co. KG (Geltendorf, Germany) (represented by: O. Spuhler and J. Stock, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 April 2020 (Case R 1714/2019-4), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark Royal Bavarian Beer.

Operative part of the order

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

2. König Ludwig International GmbH & Co. KG shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Order of the General Court of 17 May 2021 — Kerstens v Commission

(Case T-672/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Civil service - Officials - Request for assistance - Rejection of the complaint - Time limit for bringing an action - Starting point - Date on which the person concerned could have known the content of the decision - Delay - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 263/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Petrus Kerstens (La Forclaz, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Mourato, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decisions of the Commission of 20 and 31 January 2020 rejecting, respectively, the request for assistance D/517/19 and the request for assistance D/516/19 lodged by the applicant pursuant to Article 24 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Mr Petrus Kerstens shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Order of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — AI v ECDC

(Case T-79/20) (1)

(Action for annulment and for damages - Civil service - ECDC staff - Psychological harassment - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Damage to reputation - Request for assistance - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Dismissal of application - Right to be heard - Absence of prima facie evidence - Duty of care - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2021/C 382/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

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

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of ECDC’s decision of 5 April 2019 rejecting the applicant’s request for assistance of 10 April 2018 and, in so far as necessary, of ECDC’s decision of 4 November 2019 rejecting the complaint against the decision of 5 April 2019 and, secondly, compensation for the damage suffered.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. AI is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Order of the General Court of 14 June 2021 — TrekStor GmbH v EUIPO — Zagg (Protective cover for computer hardware)

(Case T-512/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a protective cover for computer hardware - Ground for invalidity - Unauthorised use of a work protected under the copyright law of a Member State - Article 25(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Request that witnesses be heard - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2021/C 310/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: TrekStor GmbH (Bensheim, Germany) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch and N. Willich, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Zagg Inc. (Midvale, Utah, United States) (represented by: T. Schmitz and M. Breuer, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 June 2020 (Case R 294/2019-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between TrekStor and Zagg.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. TrekStor GmbH shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 378, 9.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 19 October 2021 — JH v Europol

(Case T-208/20) (1)

(Action for damages - Civil service - Temporary staff - Europol - Probative value of the evidence - No act adversely affecting the applicant - Irregular nature of the pre-litigation procedure - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 502/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: JH (represented by: M. Quaas and T. Flachsbarth, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (represented by: O. Sajin and A. Ketels, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of, first, Europol’s order of 2 April 2019 to relieve him from office with immediate effect and, second, the failure to investigate a complaint against him in accordance with the applicable provisions.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. JH shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.