ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Case T-408/16: Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2018 — HX v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted against Syria — Freezing of funds — Principle of ne bis in idem — Rights of the defence — Right to a fair trial — Obligation to state reasons — Right to an effective remedy — Manifest error of assessment — Right to property — Proportionality — Right to a normal life — Damage to reputation)

Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2018 — HX v Council

(Case T-408/16) ( 1 )

‛(Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted against Syria — Freezing of funds — Principle of ne bis in idem — Rights of the defence — Right to a fair trial — Obligation to state reasons — Right to an effective remedy — Manifest error of assessment — Right to property — Proportionality — Right to a normal life — Damage to reputation)’

Parties

Applicant: HX (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: S. Koev and S. Klukowska, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: initially I. Gurov and G. Étienne, and subsequently I. Gurov and A. Vitro, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 125), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/840 of 27 May 2016 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 30), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 62), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/907 of 29 May 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 15), in so far as those measures apply to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders HX to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union.

( 1 ) OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.
Case T-770/16: Judgment of the General Court of 31 May 2018 — Korwin-Mikke v Parliament (Law governing the institutions — European Parliament — Rules of Procedure of the Parliament — Conduct adversely affecting the dignity of the Parliament and the smooth running of parliamentary business — Disciplinary sanctions of forfeiture of entitlement to the subsistence allowance and temporary suspension from participation in all activities of the Parliament — Freedom of expression — Obligation to state reasons — Error of law)

Judgment of the General Court of 31 May 2018 — Korwin-Mikke v Parliament

(Case T-770/16) ( 1 )

‛(Law governing the institutions — European Parliament — Rules of Procedure of the Parliament — Conduct adversely affecting the dignity of the Parliament and the smooth running of parliamentary business — Disciplinary sanctions of forfeiture of entitlement to the subsistence allowance and temporary suspension from participation in all activities of the Parliament — Freedom of expression — Obligation to state reasons — Error of law)’

Parties

Applicant: Janusz Korwin-Mikke (Józefów, Poland) (represented by: M. Cherchi and A. Daoût, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: S. Alonso de León and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, action brought under Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of the decision of the President of the Parliament of 5 July 2016 and of the decision of the Bureau of the Parliament of 1 August 2016 imposing on the applicant the penalty of forfeiture of entitlement to the subsistence allowance for a period of ten days and temporary suspension from participation in all activities of the Parliament for a period of five consecutive days and, second, action brought under Article 268 TFEU and seeking damages for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Bureau of the European Parliament of 1 August 2016;

2. Dismisses the claim for damages;

3. Orders Mr Janusz Korwin-Mikke and the Parliament each to bear their own respective costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 6, 9.1.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2018 — BNP Paribas v ECB

(Case T-751/16) (1)

((Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Article 4(1)(d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Calculation of the leverage ratio - Refusal of the ECB to grant authorisation to the applicant to exclude exposures meeting certain conditions from the calculation of the leverage ratio - Article 429(14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Discretion of the ECB - Errors of law - Manifest error of assessment))

(2018/C 352/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Confédération nationale du Crédit mutuel (Paris, France) (represented by: M. Grégoire and C. De Jonghe, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: K. Lackhoff, R. Bax, G. Bassani and C. Olivier, acting as Agents, and H.-G. Kamann and F. Louis, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Finland (represented by: S. Hartikainen, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of European Central Bank Decision ECB/SSM/2016-9695000CG7B84NLR5984/92 of 24 August 2016, taken pursuant to Article 4(1)(d) and Article 10 of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ 2013 L 287, p. 63), and Article 429(14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1, corrigenda OJ 2013 L 208, p. 68 and OJ 2013 L 321, p. 6).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls European Central Bank (ECB) Decision ECB/SSM/2016-9695000CG7B84NLR5984/92 of 24 August 2016;

2. Orders the ECB to pay the costs;

3. Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 9.1.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Consejo Regulador del Cava v EUIPO — Cave de Tain L’Hermitage, union des propriétaires (CAVE DE TAIN)

(Case T-774/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Figurative EU trade mark CAVE DE TAIN - Earlier designation of origin ‘CAVA’ - Concept of ‘evocation’ of a protected designation of origin - Article 103(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013))

(2018/C 311/13)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Consejo Regulador del Cava (Villafranca del Penedès, Spain) (represented by: C. Prat, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Zaera Cuadrado and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Cave de Tain L’Hermitage (Tain l’Hermitage, France) (represented by J.-P. Stouls, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2016 (Case R 980/2015-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Consejo Regulador del Cava and Cave de Tain L’Hermitage, union des propriétaires.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Consejo Regulador del Cava to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 9.1.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 October 2018 — Multiconnect v Commission

(Case T-884/16) (1)

(Action for annulment - Competition - Concentrations - Retail market for mobile telecommunications services and market for wholesale access and call origination in Germany - Acquisition of E-plus by Telefónica Deutschland - Decision declaring the concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Implementation of the non-MNO component of the Final Commitments - Measures against which no action may be brought - Inadmissibility)

(2018/C 427/58)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Multiconnect GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: J.-M. Schultze, S. Pautke and C. Ehlenz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan, M. Farley and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking, inter alia, annulment of the purported decisions of the Commission contained in the emails of 11 and 29 October 2016 relating to the implementation of the non-MNO remedy provided for in the Final Commitments made obligatory by Commission Decision C(2014) 4443 final of 2 July 2014 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement, subject to compliance with certain commitments (Case COMP/M.7018 Telefónica Deutschland/E-plus).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by Telefónica Deutschland Holding AG and by Drillisch AG;

3. Orders Multiconnect GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission;

4. Orders Telefónica Deutschland Holding to bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene;

5. Orders Drillisch to bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

(1) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2018 — Czech Republic v Commission

(Case T-627/16) (1)

((EAGF - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by the Czech Republic - Decoupled direct aid - Remote-sensing checks - Wine-growing sector - Cross-compliance - Reoccurrence of non-compliance))

(2018/C 392/25)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Pavliš and J. Vláčil, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou, Z. Malůšková and K. Walkerová, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: F. Bergius, A. Falk, C. Meyer-Seitz and H. Shev, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1059 of 20 June 2016 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 2016 L 173, p. 59), in so far as it excludes the payments made by the Czech Republic under the EAGF in the amount of EUR 30 206 401,58.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1059 of 20 June 2016 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), in so far as it excludes the payments made by the Czech Republic under the EAGF in the amount of EUR 6 356 909,30 in respect of cross-compliance checks for the financial year 2011;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the European Commission, the Czech Republic and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2018 — Lithuania v Commission

(Case T-34/16) (1)

(EAGF - Expenditure excluded from financing - Specific support for the bovine and ovine meat sectors - On-site inspections - Physical verification of the animals - Quality of the inspections - Inspection report - Flat-rate correction - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality - One-off correction)

(2019/C 4/29)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: initially, D. Kriaučiūnas, T. Orlickas and R. Krasuckaitė, and subsequently T. Orlickas and R. Krasuckaitė, acting as Agents)

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

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/2098 of 13 November 2015 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 2015 L 303, p. 35).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Lithuania to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 4.4.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 October 2018 — McCoy v Committee of the Regions

(Case T-567/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Officials - Social security - Occupational disease - Occupational origin of the disease - Fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations - Invalidity Committee - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Liability - Non-material damage))

(2018/C 436/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Robert McCoy (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: Committee of the Regions (represented by: J. C. Cañoto Argüelles and S. Bachotet, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Committee of the Regions of 2 December 2014 confirming the conclusions of the Invalidity Committee of 7 May 2014 by which it rejected the applicant’s request to recognise the occupational origin of the disease from which he is suffering and, secondly, to compensate for the non-material damage of EUR 25 000 which the applicant allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Bureau of the Committee of the Regions of 2 December 2014 refusing to recognise the occupational origin of the disease resulting in Mr Robert McCoy's invalidity within the meaning of the fifth paragraph of Article 78 of the Staff Regulations.

2. Orders the Committee of the Regions to pay Mr McCoy the sum of EUR 5 000.

3. Orders the Committee of the Regions is to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 7 of 11.1.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-139/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 December 2018 — Vans v EUIPO — Deichmann (V)

(Case T-817/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark V - Earlier international figurative mark V - Proof of the existence, validity and scope of the protection of an earlier trade mark - Rule 19(2)(a)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7(2)(a)(ii) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 72/25)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Vans, Inc. (Cypress, California, United States) (represented by: M. Hirsch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by: S. Hanne, subsequently by: A. Söder and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Deichmann SE (Essen, Germany) (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 September 2016 (Case R 2030/2015-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Deichmann and Vans.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Vans, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 22, 23.1.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 November 2018 — Janssen-Cases v Commission

(Case T-688/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Officials - Recruitment - Vacancy notice - Commission Mediator - Competent appointing authority - Delegation of powers - Procedure - Consultation of the Staff Committee - Liability))

(2019/C 44/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mercedes Janssen-Cases (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: initially, J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, and, subsequently, J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, and, subsequently, G. Berscheid and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the Commission decision of 15 June 2016 appointing W as the Commission Mediator and the note of 16 June 2016 by which the Commission informed the applicant of the result of the selection procedure and, secondly, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 15 June 2016 appointing W as the Commission Mediator and the note of 16 June 2016 by which the Commission informed Ms Mercedes Janssen-Cases of the result of the selection procedure for that post;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Commission to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief.

(1) OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2018 — Fruits de Ponent v Commission

(Case T-290/16) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Agriculture - Peach and nectarine markets - Disruption during the 2014 season - Russian embargo - Temporary exceptional support measures for producers - Delegated Regulations (EU) Nos 913/2014 and 923/2014 - Rules of law intended to confer rights upon individuals - Duty of diligence and the principle of sound administration - Sufficiently serious breach - Causal link))

(2019/C 82/47)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Fruits de Ponent, SCCL (Alcarràs, Spain) (represented by M. Roca Junyent, J. Mier Albert, R. Vallina Hoset and A. Sellés Marco, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by I. Galindo Martín and K. Skelly, and subsequently by I. Galindo Martín, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly sustained by three of the applicant’s members on account of acts and omissions of the Commission, in the context of the adoption of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 913/2014 of 21 August 2014 laying down temporary exceptional support measures for producers of peaches and nectarines (OJ 2014 L 248, p. 1) and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 932/2014 of 29 August 2014 laying down temporary exceptional support measures for producers of certain fruit and vegetables and amending Delegated Regulation (EU) No 913/2014 (OJ 2014 L 259, p. 2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Fruits de Ponent, SCCL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2018 — Carpenito and Others v Council

(Joined Cases T-543/16 and T-544/16) (1)

((Civil service - Remuneration - Annual adjustment of the remuneration and pensions of officials and other EU staff - Regulations (EU) No 422/2014 and No 423/2014 - Adjustments of salaries and pensions for the years 2011 and 2012 - Duty to state reasons - Proportionality - Legitimate expectations - Rules on social dialogue))

(2019/C 82/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant in Case T-543/16: Renzo Carpenito (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Applicants in Case T-544/16: Maria Kannellopoulou (Cranves-Sales, France), José Carlos Lechado García (Brussels, Belgium), Bernd Loescher (Rhode-Saint-Genèse, Belgium), Evelina Milenova (Brussels) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by M. Bauer and M. Veiga and subsequently by M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: M. Ecker and E. Taneva, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the Council decisions to apply to the applicants’ salaries or pensions the 0 % adjustment for the year 2011 provided for in Regulation (EU) No 422/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, adjusting with effect from 1 July 2011 the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (OJ 2014 L 129, p. 5), and the 0,8 % adjustment for the year 2012, provided for in Regulation (EU) No 423/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 adjusting with effect from 1 July 2012 the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Union and the correction coefficients applied thereto (OJ 2014 L 129, p. 12), and, secondly, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders the applicants to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Parliament to pay its own costs.

(1) OJ C 146, 4.5.2015 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-31/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2019 — Almashreq Investment Fund v Council

(Case T-415/16) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Duty to state reasons - Error of assessment - Right to respect for one’s good name and reputation - Right to property - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality)

(2019/C 139/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Almashreq Investment Fund (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Kyriakopoulou, G. Étienne and A. Vitro, subsequently by S. Kyriakopoulou and A. Vitro, and finally by S. Kyriakopoulou, A. Vitro and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application brought pursuant to Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2016, L 141, p. 125) and its subsequent implementing acts, Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 amending Decision 2013/255 CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017, L 139, p. 62) and Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/778 of 28 May 2018 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2018, L 131, p. 16), in so far as they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Almashreq Investment Fund to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.