ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 319/15

Judgment of the General Court of 21 September 2011 — Rügen Fisch v OHIM — Schwaaner Fischwaren (SCOMBER MIX)

(Case T-201/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark SCOMBER MIX - Absolute grounds of refusal - 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))

2011/C 319/29

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Rügen Fisch AG (Sassnitz, Germany) (represented by: O. Spuhler and M. Geitz, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Schwaaner Fischwaren GmbH (Schwaan, Germany) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2009 (Case R 230/2007-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Rügen Fisch AG and Schwaaner Fischwaren GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Rügen Fisch AG to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/19

Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2011 — Nycomed Danmark v EMA

(Case T-52/09) (1)

(Medicinal products for human use - Authorisation to place a medicinal product on the market - Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 - Application for a waiver from the obligation to submit a paediatric investigation plan - Rejection by the EMA - Misuse of powers)

2012/C 32/35

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Nycomed Denmark ApS (Roskilde, Denmark) (represented: initially by C. Schoonderbeek and H. Speyart van Woerden, lawyers, and subsequently by C. Schoonderbeek)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by: V. Salvatore and N. Rampal Olmedo, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by L. Inez Fernandes and P. Antunes, Agents); Kingdom of Belgium, (represented by T. Materne and C. Pochet, Agents); United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by S. Ossowski and H. Walker, Agents, and by J. Stratford, Barrister); French Republic (represented by G. de Bergues, A. Adam, R. Loosli Surrans and J.-S. Pilczer, Agents); and European Commission (represented by P. Oliver and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) of 28 November 2008 rejecting the applicant’s application for a specific waiver with respect to perflubutane in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as amended.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nycomed Danmark ApS to bear its own costs and those of the European Medicines Agency (EMA), including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures;

3. Orders the Portuguese Republic, the Kingdom of Belgium, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the French Republic and the European Commission to bear their own costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/11

Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2011 — Dennekamp v Parliament

(Case T-82/09) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to the affiliation of certain Members of the European Parliament to the additional pension scheme - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual - Article 8(b) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 - Transfer of personal data)

2012/C 13/20

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Gert-Jan Dennekamp (Giethoorn, Netherlands) (represented by: O. Brouwer, A. Stoffer and T. Oeyen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented initially by N. Lorenz, H. Krück and D. Moore, and subsequently by N. Lorenz and D. Moore, Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: B. Weis Fogh, J. Bering Liisberg and S. Juul Jørgensen, Agents); Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski and H. Leppo, Agents); and European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) (represented initially by H. Hijmans and H. Kranenborg, and subsequently by H. Kranenborg and I. Chatelier, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Decision A(2008) 22050 of the European Parliament of 17 December 2008 refusing to grant the applicant access to certain documents relating to the affiliation of certain Members of the European Parliament to the additional pension scheme.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Gert-Jan Dennekamp to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Denmark, the Republic of Finland and the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 138/14

Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2012 — Hipp v OHIM — Nestlé (Bebio)

(Case T-41/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Bebio - Earlier Community word mark and international word mark BEBA - Partial refusal of registration - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2012/C 138/25

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hipp & Co. KG (Sachseln, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey and A. Bognár, lawyers)

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, intervening before the General Court: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented: initially by I. Valdelomar Serrano and subsequently by R. Mottola and D. Gabarre Armengol, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 November 2008 (Case R 1790/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Société des Produits Nestlé, S.A. and Hipp & Co KG

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hipp & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 89/20

Judgment of the General Court of 14 February 2012 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-59/09) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to an infringement procedure which has been closed - Documents originating from a Member State - Grant of access - Prior agreement of the Member State)

2012/C 89/32

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma, B. Klein and A. Wiedmann, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders, P. Costa de Oliveira and F. Hoffmeister, Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented: initially by M. Muñoz Pérez, and subsequently by S. Centeno Huerta, Agents); and Republic of Poland (represented: initially by M. Dowgielewicz, and subsequently by M. Szpunar and B. Majczyna, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented: initially by J. Bering Liisberg and B. Weis Fogh, and subsequently by S. Juul Jørgensen and C. Vang, Agents); Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski, Agent); and Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: K. Petkovska, A. Falk and S. Johannesson, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision SG.E.3/RG/mbp D(2008) 10067 of 5 December 2008 granting some citizens access to certain documents submitted by the Federal Republic of Germany in infringement procedure No 2005/4569.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs and those of the European Commission.

3. Orders the Kingdom of Denmark, the Kingdom of Spain, the Republic of Finland, the Republic of Poland and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 113, 16.5.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/17

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — medi v OHIM (medi)

(Case T-470/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark medi - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009)

2012/C 258/28

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: medi GmbH & Co. KG (Bayreuth, Germany) (represented by: H. Lindner, D. Terheggen and T. Kiphuth, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 October 2009 (Case R 692/2008-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign medi as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Medi GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 24, 30.1.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/13

Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2012 — Hearst Communications, Inc., v OHIM — Vida Estética (COSMOBELLEZA)

(Case T-344/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark COSMOBELLEZA - Earlier national and international word and figurative marks COSMO, COSMOPOLITAN, COSMOTEST, COSMOPOLITAN TELEVISION and THE COSMOPOLITAN SHOW - Non registered marks and trade names COSMO and COSMOPOLITAN - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the marks - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 235/31

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hearst Communications, Inc., (New York, United States) (represented by: A. Nordemann, C. Czychowski and A. Nordemann-Schiffel, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by C. Bartos, and subsequently by V. Melgar, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Vida Estética, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: A.I. Alejos Cutuli, lawyer)

Re:

Action against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 June 2009 (Case R 770/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Hearst Communications, Inc. and Vida Estética, SL

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hearst Communications, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 256, 24.10.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 373/4

Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2012 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-491/09) (1)

(EAGGF - ‘Guarantee’ section - Expenditure excluded from financing - Premiums in the ovine and caprine meat sector - On-the-spot inspections)

2012/C 373/05

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented initially by M. Muñoz Pérez; subsequently by S. Martínez-Lage Sobredo and finally by A. Rubio González, abogados del Estado)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2009/721/EC of 24 September 2009 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2009 L 257, p. 28).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 37, 13.2.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 355/22

Judgment of the General Court of (Sixth Chamber) of 27 September 2012 — Applied Microengineering v Commission

(Case T-387/09) (1)

(Fifth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration - Contracts concerning the projects ‘Formation of a New Design House for MST’ and ‘Assessment of a New Anodic Bonder’ - Recovery of part of the financial contribution paid - Enforceable decision - Decision amending the contested decision during the proceedings - Legal basis of the action - Nature of the pleas put forward - Legitimate expectations - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based - Principle of sound administration)

2012/C 355/46

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Applied Microengineering Ltd (Didcot, United Kingdom) (represented: initially by P. Walravens and J. De Wachter, and subsequently by P. Walravens and J. Blockx, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Petrova, acting as Agent, assisted by R. Van der Hout, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 5797 of 16 July 2009 relating to the recovery of the sum of EUR 258 560.61 plus interest payable by the applicant in the framework of the projects IST-199-11823 FOND MST (‘Formation of a New Design House for MST’) and IST-2000-28229 ANAB (‘Assessment of a New Anodic Bonder’).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Applied Microengineering Ltd, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 312, 19.12.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 225/62

Judgment of the General Court of 18 June 2013 — Portugal v Commission

(Case T-509/09) (1)

(Fisheries - Financial contribution for the implementation of control and surveillance systems - Decision not to reimburse expenditure incurred for the purchase of two Ocean Patrol Vessels (OPV) - Article 296 EC - Directive 93/36/EEC - Legitimate expectations - Obligation to state reasons)

2013/C 225/138

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented: initially by L. Inez Fernandes, A. Trindade Mimoso and A. Miranda Boavida, and subsequently by I. Inez Fernandes, H. Leitão and V. Coelho, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and M. Afonso, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision of 14 October 2009 declaring ineligible for European Union financial support under Commission Decision 2002/978/EC of 10 December 2002 on the eligibility of expenditure on a number of operations to be incurred by certain Member States in 2002 in implementing the control, inspection and surveillance systems applicable to the common fisheries policy (OJ 2002 L 338, p. 33) expenditure associated with the purchase of two Ocean Patrol Vessels (OPV), to be used partly for the control and surveillance of fishing activities.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 80, 27.3.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/17

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2012 — Almamet v Commission

(Case T-410/09) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for calcium carbide and magnesium for the steel and gas industries in the EEA, with the exception of Ireland, Spain, Portugal and the United Kingdom - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Price-fixing and market-sharing - Rights of the defence - Commission’s powers in inspections - Single and continuous infringement - Fines - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Proportionality - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines)

2013/C 32/25

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Almamet GmbH Handel mit Spänen und Pulvern aus Metall (Ainring, Germany) (represented by: S. Hautbourg and C. Renner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan, V. Bottka and N. von Lingen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 5791 final of 22 July 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.396 — Calcium carbide and magnesium based reagents for the steel and gas industries), in so far as it concerns the applicant, and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Almamet GmbH Handel mit Spänen und Pulvern aus Metall to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 312, 19.12.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 194/19

Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2014 — Dunamenti Erőmű v Commission

(Case T-179/09) (1)

((State aid - Aid awarded by the Hungarian authorities to certain electricity generators - Power purchase agreements concluded between a public undertaking and certain electricity generators - Decision declaring the State aid incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery - Concept of State aid - Advantage - New aid - Operating aid - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty))

2014/C 194/24

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dunamenti Erőmű Zrt. (Százhalombatta, Hungary) (represented by: initially J. Lever QC, A. Nourry, R. Griffith and S. Spence, Solicitors, and subsequently J. Philippe and F.-H. Boret, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and K. Talabér-Ritz, Agents)

Re:

Application for, in essence, the annulment of Commission Decision 2009/609/EC of 4 June 2008 on the State aid C 41/05 awarded by Hungary through Power Purchase Agreements (OJ 2009 L 225, p. 53) and, in the alternative, the annulment of Articles 2 and 5 of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Dunamenti Erőmű Zrt. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 167, 18.7.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 336/15

Judgment of the General Court of 16 September 2013 — Müller-Boré & Partner v OHIM — Popp and Others (MBP)

(Case T-338/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark MBP - Earlier Community word mark ip_law@mbp./email - 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) - National sign used in the course of trade mbp.de - Article 8(4) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation 207/2009)

2013/C 336/30

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: M Müller-Boré & Partner Patentanwälte. Rechtsanwälte (Munich, Germany) (represented by: C. Osterrieth and T. Schmitz, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by S. Schäffner, then A. Pohlmann, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Eugen Popp (Munich, Germany); Wolf E. Sajda (Munich); Johannes Bohnenberger (Munich); and Volkmar Kruspig (Munich) (represented by: C. Rohnke, M. Jacob and J. Herrlinger, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 June 2009 (Case R 1176/2007-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Eugen Popp, Wolf E. Sajda, Johannes Bohnenberger, Volkmar Kruspig and Müller-Boré & Partner Rechtsanwälte. Patentanwälte.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Müller-Boré & Partner Patentanwälte. Rechtsanwälte to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 136/24

Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2016 — Advance Magazine Publishers v OHIM — Selecciones Americanas (VOGUE CAFÉ)

(Case T-40/09) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Community word mark VOGUE CAFÉ - Earlier national figurative marks Vogue and VOGUE studio and application for the Community figurative mark VOGUE - Genuine use of earlier marks - Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 136/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: T. Alkin, Barrister)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially R. Pethke and D. Botis, and subsequently I. Harrington, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Selecciones Americanas, SA (Sitges, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 November 2008 (Case R 0280/2008-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Selecciones Americanas, SA and Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 November 2008 (Case R 0280/2008-4), in so far as it concludes that there is a likelihood of confusion between the Community trade mark applied for, VOGUE CAFÉ, and the Spanish figurative mark VOGUE studio registered under number 2529728;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 34/20

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2014 — SP v Commission

(Cases T-472/09 and T-55/10) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for concrete reinforcing bars in bars or coils - Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Fixing of prices and payment terms - Limiting or controlling output or sales - Infringement of essential procedural requirements - Legal basis - Misuse of powers and abuse of procedure - Fines - Ceiling laid down by Article 23(2) of Regulation No 1/2003 - Action for annulment - Amending decision - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 034/21)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: SP SpA (Brescia, Italy) (represented by: G. Belotti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented, in Case T-472/09, initially by R. Sauer, V. Di Bucci and B. Gencarelli, and subsequently by R. Sauer and R. Striani, acting as Agents, assisted by M. Moretto, lawyer, and in Case T-55/10, initially by R. Sauer and B. Gencarelli, and subsequently by R. Sauer and R. Striani, assisted by M. Moretto)

Re:

In Case T-472/09, application for a declaration of the non-existence or for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, readoption), in the alternative, application for annulment of Article 2 of that decision, and in the further alternative, application for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant, and in Case T-55/10, application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009, amending Decision C(2009) 7492 final.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders that Cases T-472/09 and T-55/10 be joined for the purposes of the judgment;

2. In Case T-472/09, SP v Commission: — Annuls Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009, relating to a proceeding under Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, readoption) in so far as it imposes a fine of EUR 14,35 million jointly and severally on SP SpA; — Dismisses the action as to the remainder; — Orders SP to bear half of its own costs; — Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by SP;

3. In Case T-55/10, SP v Commission: — Dismisses the action; — Orders SP to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 24, 30.1.2010.