ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/37

Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2017 — Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret v EUIPO — Nadal Esteban (STYLO & KOTON)

(Case T-687/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark STYLO & KOTON - Absolute ground for refusal - Article 52(1)(b) of (EC) Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of (EU) Regulation 2017/1001) - No bad faith))

(2018/C 022/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: J. Güell Serra and E. Stoyanov Edissonov, lawyers)

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: Joaquín Nadal Esteban (Alcobendas, Spain) (represented by: J. Donoso Romero, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 June 2016 (Case R 1779/2015-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret and Mr Nadal Esteban.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/17

Judgment of the General Court of 22 November 2017 — Toontrack Music v EUIPO (EZMIX)

(Case T-771/16) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for EU word mark EZMIX - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Equal treatment and principle of sound administration))

(2018/C 013/28)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Toontrack Music AB (Umeå, Sweden) (represented by: L.-E. Ström, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 July 2016 (Case R 2436/2015-5) concerning an application for registration of word mark EZMIX as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Toontrack Music AB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 42/20

Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2017 — Trautmann v EEAS

(Case T-611/16) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Remuneration - Family allowances - Education allowance - Article 15 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations - Conditions for grant - Article 3(1) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Regular full-time attendance at an educational establishment which charges fees - Article 85 of the Staff Regulations - Recovery of sums overpaid - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard))

(2018/C 042/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Ernst Ulrich Trautmann (Kraainem, Belgium) (represented by: M. Meyer, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, the annulment (i) of the decision of the appointing authority of the EEAS of 18 November 2015 to reassess the amount of the education allowance due to the applicant, (ii) of the decision of the Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (PMO) of 12 January 2016 to recover, by means of deductions from pay, the sums unduly paid to the applicant, (iii) of the decision of 12 May 2016 rejecting the complaints against those decisions, and, second, and an order requiring the EEAS to return to the applicant the sums previously paid in accordance with his right to the education allowance.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Ernst Ulrich Trautmann to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 10.10.2016 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under the number F-41/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/29

Judgment of the General Court of 5 December 2017 — Tuerck v Commission

(Case T-728/16) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Pensions - Transfer of national pension rights - Capital appreciation between the date of the application for a transfer and the actual date of the transfer))

(2018/C 032/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Sabine Tuerck (Woluwe-Saint-Pierre, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s decision of 10 December 2015 confirming the transfer to the European Union pension scheme of the pension rights acquired by the applicant prior to her entering the service of the European Union.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 10 December 2015 confirming the transfer to the European Union pension scheme of the pension rights acquired by Ms Sabine Tuerck prior to her entering the service of the European Union;

2. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 475, 19.12.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 72/36

Judgment of the General Court of 18 January 2018 — LG Electronics v EUIPO (Dual Edge)

(Case T-804/16) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for EU word mark Dual Edge - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 072/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, South Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 September 2016 (Case R 832/2016-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Dual Edge as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LG Electronics, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 22, 23.1.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 42/18

Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2017 — Campo and Others v EEAS

(Case T-577/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Officials - Agents - Remuneration - EEAS staff posted to a third country - Article 10 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations - Annual assessment of the allowance for living conditions - Decision reducing the allowance for living conditions in Montenegro from 15 % to 10 % - Plea of illegality))

(2018/C 042/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Alessandro Campo (Podgorica, Montenegro) and the 12 other applicants whose names are set out in the annex to the judgment (represented by: N. de Montigny and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt, Agent, and M. Troncoso Ferrer, F.-M. Hislaire and S. Moya Izquierdo, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the applicants’ salary slips in respect of March 2015 and of those drawn up afterwards in so far as those salary slips apply the decision of the EEAS of 23 February 2015 reducing, with effect from 1 January 2015, the allowance for living conditions paid to EU staff posted to Montenegro.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the salary slips for March 2015 of Mr Alessandro Campo and of the other officials and agents of the European External Action Service (EEAS), whose names are set out in the annex drawn up by the EEAS on the date on which the action was brought, in so far as those slips apply the decision of the EEAS of 23 February 2015 reducing, with effect from 1 January 2015, the allowance for living conditions paid to EU staff posted to Montenegro;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the EEAS to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 25.4.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal as Case F-6/16, transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/35

Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2018 — Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ v EUIPO — Krasnyiy oktyabr (Representation of a crayfish)

(Case T-775/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark representing a crayfish - Earlier international registration of the figurative mark РАКОВЫЕ ШЕЙКИ - 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)))

(2018/C 104/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: R. Žabolienė and I. Lukauskienė, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the Court: Moscow Confectionery Factory ‘Krasnyiy oktyabr’ OAO (Moscow, Russia) (represented by O. Spuhler, M. Geitz and J. Stock, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 August 2016 (Case R 2419/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Moscow Confectionary Factory ‘Krasnyiy oktyabr’ and Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 475, 19.12.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 94/18

Judgment of the General Court of 30 January 2018 — Arctic Cat v EUIPO — Slazengers (Representation of a member of the cat family jumping to the right)

(Case T-113/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark representing a member of the cat family jumping to the right - Earlier EU figurative mark representing a member of the cat family jumping to the left - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 094/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Arctic Cat Inc. (Thief River Falls, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: M. Hartmann and S. Fröhlich, lawyers)

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: Slazengers Ltd (Burnham, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2016 (Case R 2953/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Slazengers and Arctic Cat.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Arctic Cat Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 175, 17.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 142/42

Judgment of the General Court of 7 March 2018 –Le Pen v Parliament

(Case T-140/16) (1)

((Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances of Members of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid - Authority of the Secretary-General - Burden of proof - Obligation to state reasons - Misuse of powers - Error of fact - Equal treatment))

(2018/C 142/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Jean-Marie Le Pen (Saint-Cloud, France) (represented initially by M. Ceccaldi and J.-P. Le Moigne, subsequently by M. Ceccaldi, and finally by F. Wagner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by S. Seyr and G. Corstens, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 29 January 2016 relating to the recovery from the applicant of a sum of EUR 320 026,23 unduly paid for parliamentary assistance and of the related debit note of 4 February 2016.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Jean-Marie Le Pen to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 134/19

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2018 — Hansen Medical v EUIPO — Covidien (MAGELLAN)

(Case T-222/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark MAGELLAN - Genuine use - Burden of proof - Article 15 and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18 and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Procedural irregularity committed by the Cancellation Division - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Oral proceedings - Article 77 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 96 of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 134/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hansen Medical, Inc. (Mountain View, California, United States) (represented by: R. Kunze, G. Würtenberger and T. Wittmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Covidien AG (Neuhausen am Rheinfall, Switzerland) (represented by: R. Ingerl and D. Wiedemann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 February 2016 (Cases R 3092/2014-2 and R 3118/2014-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Hansen Medical and Covidien.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hansen Medical, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.
Case T-426/16: Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2018 — Perfumes y Aromas Artesanales v EUIPO — Aromas Selective (Aa AROMAS artesanales) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Aa AROMAS artesanales — Earlier EU figurative mark Aromas PERFUMARIA Beleza em todos os sentidos — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Identity or similarity of the services — Similarity of the signs — Relevant public — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2018 — Perfumes y Aromas Artesanales v EUIPO — Aromas Selective (Aa AROMAS artesanales)

(Case T-426/16) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Aa AROMAS artesanales — Earlier EU figurative mark Aromas PERFUMARIA Beleza em todos os sentidos — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Identity or similarity of the services — Similarity of the signs — Relevant public — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Perfumes y Aromas Artesanales, SL (Arganda del Rey, Spain) (represented by: J. Botella Reyna, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Aromas Selective, SL (Dos Hermanas, Spain) (represented by: I. Temiño Ceniceros and J. Oria Sousa-Montes, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 May 2016 (Case R 766/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Aromas Selective and Perfumes y Aromas Artesanales.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Perfumes y Aromas Artesanales, SL, to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Aromas Selective, SL, including the costs necessarily incurred by Aromas Selective, SL, before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

( 1 ) OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 161/48

Judgment of the General Court of 22 March 2018 — HJ v EMA

(Case T-579/16) (1)

((Civil service - Temporary staff - Refusal to renew a fixed-term contract - First paragraph of Article 8 of the CEOS - Reclassification of a fixed-term contract as an indefinite contract - Manifest error of assessment - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Duty to state reasons - Right to be heard - Appraisal report - Duty to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment))

(2018/C 161/53)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: HJ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by: F. Cooney and N. Rampal Olmedo, Agents, and A. Duron and D. Waelbroeck, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the applicants appraisal report relating to the period from 16 February 2014 to 31 December 2014, of the EMA’s decision dated 1 April 2015 not to renew the applicant’s contract as a member of the temporary staff and of the two decisions dated 26 October 2015 rejecting the complaints brought by the applicant against those measures and, secondly, an application for compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders HJ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 25.4.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under number F-8/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Case T-860/16: Judgment of the General Court of 15 May 2018 — Wirecard v EUIPO (mycard2go) (EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark mycard2go — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 15 May 2018 — Wirecard v EUIPO (mycard2go)

(Case T-860/16) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark mycard2go — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Wirecard AG (Aschheim, Germany) (represented by: A. Bayer, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 October 2016 (Case R 281/2016-4) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign mycard2go as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Wirecard AG to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Case T-48/16: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Sigma Orionis v Commission (Arbitration clause — Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (2007-2013) and ‘Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ — Suspension of payments and termination of grant contracts following a financial audit — Action seeking to obtain payment of the amounts owed by the Commission in the context of the implementation of the grant contracts — Non-contractual liability)

Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Sigma Orionis v Commission

(Case T-48/16) ( 1 )

‛(Arbitration clause — Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (2007-2013) and ‘Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ — Suspension of payments and termination of grant contracts following a financial audit — Action seeking to obtain payment of the amounts owed by the Commission in the context of the implementation of the grant contracts — Non-contractual liability)’

Parties

Applicant: Sigma Orionis SA (Valbonne, France) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Dintilhac and M. Siekierzyńska, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, an action under Article 272 TFEU seeking an order directing the Commission to pay to the applicant the amounts owed pursuant to contracts concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (2007-2013) and ‘Horizon 2020 — the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ and, second, an action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the breach by the Commission of its obligations.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sigma Orionis SA to pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.

( 1 ) OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.
Case T-859/16: Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2018 — Damm v EUIPO — Schlossbrauerei Au, Willibald Beck Freiherr von Peccoz (EISKELLER) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark EISKELLER — Earlier national word marks KELER and KELER 18 — Relative ground for refusal — No similarity between the signs — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2018 — Damm v EUIPO — Schlossbrauerei Au, Willibald Beck Freiherr von Peccoz (EISKELLER)

(Case T-859/16) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark EISKELLER — Earlier national word marks KELER and KELER 18 — Relative ground for refusal — No similarity between the signs — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Sociedad Anónima Damm (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón and C. Aguilera Montañez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: I. Harrington, D. Hanf, V. Ruzek and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Schlossbrauerei Au, Willibald Beck Freiherr von Peccoz GmbH & Co. KG (Au-Hallertau, Germany) (represented by: C. Thomas and V. Schwepler, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2016 (Case R 2428/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Sociedad Anónima Damm and Schlossbrauerei Au, Willibald Beck Freiherr von Peccoz.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sociedad Anónima Damm to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.