ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 437/28

Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2017 — De Nicola v Court of Justice of the European Union

(Case T-99/16) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Civil service - EIB staff - Psychological harassment - Failure to comply with the rules governing the right to a fair hearing - Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Reasonable time - Claims for compensation made in the context of an action pending before the Civil Service Tribunal - Partial referral of the case to the General Court))

(2017/C 437/33)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Carlo De Nicola (Strassen, Luxembourg) (represented by: initially by L. Isola and G. Isola, and subsequently by G. Ferabecoli, lawyers)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: initially by J. Inghelram, P. Giusta and L. Tonini Alabiso, and subsequently by J. Inghelram, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of, first, the psychological harassment to which he has been subjected by the European Investment Bank (EIB), on the one hand, and the supposedly unfair nature of the proceedings before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal and the General Court to which he has been a party, on the other, and, second, the allegedly excessive duration of those proceedings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Carlo De Nicola to pay the costs relating to the present proceedings before both the General Court of the European Union and the European Union Civil Service Tribunal.

(1) OJ C 414, 14.12.2015 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal as Case F-100/15).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/37

Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2017 — Montel v Parliament

(Case T-634/16) (1)

((Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums wrongfully paid - Power of the Secretary-General - Electa una via - Rights of the defence - Burden of proof - Obligation to state reasons - Legitimate expectations - Political rights - Equal treatment - Misuse of power - Independence of the Members - Error of fact - Proportionality))

(2018/C 022/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Sophie Montel (Saint-Vit, France) (represented by: G. Sauveur, lawyer)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, R. Meyer and A. Jensen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 24 June 2016 concerning the recovery of a sum of EUR 77 276,42 wrongfully paid as parliamentary assistance allowance, of the notification and measures implementing that decision contained in the letters of the Director-General for Finance of the Parliament of 5 and 6 July 2016 and the debit note of 4 July 2016 relating thereto and application on the basis of Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation of the loss which the applicant allegedly suffered due, in particular, to that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 24 June 2016 concerning the recovery from Ms Sophie Montel of a sum of EUR 77 276,42 wrongfully paid as parliamentary assistance allowance and the debit note of 4 July 2016 relating thereto insofar as they concern sums paid between February and April 2015;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders Ms Montel, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 383, 17.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/14

Judgment of the General Court of 20 November 2017 — Stada Arzneimittel v EUIPO — Urgo recherche innovation et développement (Immunostad)

(Case T-403/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Immunostad - Earlier national word mark ImmunoStim - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity of the trade marks - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Non-negligible part of the relevant public - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 013/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stada Arzneimittel AG (Bad Vilbel, Germany) (represented by: R. Kaase and J.-C. Plate, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Urgo recherche innovation et développement, formerly Société de développement et de recherche industrielle, then Vivatech (Chenôve, France) (represented by: A. Sion and A. Delafond-Nielsen, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 April 2016 (Case R 863/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Vivatech and Stada Arzneimittel.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Stada Arzneimittel AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 335, 12.9.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 42/15

Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — Delfin Wellness v EUIPO — Laher (Infrared and sauna cabins)

(Case T-114/16) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered community designs representing infrared and sauna cabins - Earlier designs - Ground for invalidity - Lack of novelty - Article 5 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Disclosure of the earlier designs before the date of priority - Article 7(1) and (2) of Regulation No 6/2002 - Right to be heard - Article 64(1) of Regulation No 6/2002))

(2018/C 042/21)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Delfin Wellness GmbH (Leonding, Austria) (represented by: T. Riedler, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Sabine Laher (Weyer, Austria) (represented by: P. Pfeil, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against three decisions of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 January 2016 (Cases R 849/2014–3, R 850/2014–3 and R 851/2014–3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Delfin Wellness and Ms Laher.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Delfin Wellness GmbH to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Ms Sabine Laher for the purposes of the three sets of proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 165, 10.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/28

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2017 — Colgate-Palmolive v EUIPO (360o)

(Case T-333/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark 360o - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 032/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Colgate-Palmolive Co. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: M. Zintler and A. Stolz, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 April 2016 (Case R 2287/2015-4), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign 360o as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Colgate-Palmolive Co. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 296, 16.8.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 83/20

Judgment of the General Court of 23 January 2018 — FV v Council

(Case T-639/16) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Appraisal - Career evaluation report - Appraisal year 2013 - Dismissal of action at first instance - Composition of the adjudicating Chamber which delivered the judgment at first instance - Procedure for the appointment of a judge to the Civil Service Tribunal - Tribunal established by law - Principle of the lawful judge))

(2018/C 083/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: FV (represented by: L. Levi, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-B. Laignelot and M. Bauer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 28 June 2016, FV v Council (F-40/15, EU:F:2016:137), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 28 June 2016, FV v Council, (F-40/15);

2. Refers the action to a Chamber of the Tribunal other than that which has ruled in the present appeal;

3. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 42/19

Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017 — HQ v CPVO

(Case T-592/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Decision not to renew - Manifest error of assessment - Duty of care - Principle of sound administration - Right to be heard - Psychological harassment - Misuse of powers - Liability))

(2018/C 042/26)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendants: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) (represented by: A. Verdini, acting as Agent, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and de A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU, seeking, first, annulment of the CPVO decisions of 24 June 2015 not to renew the applicant's contract and of 20 January 2016 rejecting the complaint and, secondly, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders HQ to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 251, of 11.7.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-22/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/36

Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2018 — Şölen Çikolata Gıda Sanayi ve Ticaret v EUIPO — Zaharieva (Ice cream cornet packaging)

(Case T-794/16) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an ice cream cornet - Earlier international registration designating Bulgaria - Ground for invalidity - Use in the subsequent design of a distinctive sign the holder of which has the right to prohibit such use - Article 25(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 62 of Regulation No 6/2002 - Duty of diligence - Article 63(1) of Regulation No 6/2002))

(2018/C 104/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Şölen Çikolata Gıda Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ (Şehitkamil Gaziantep, Turkey) (represented by: T. Tsenova, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the Court: Elka Zaharieva (Plovdiv, Bulgaria) (represented by: A. Kostov, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 September 2016 (Case R 1144/2015-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Şölen Çikolata Gıda Sanayi ve Ticaret and Mrs Zaharieva.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 September 2016 (Case R 1144/2015-3);

2. Grants the application for a declaration that the design registered under number 002343244-0001 is invalid;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Şölen Çikolata Gıda Sanayi ve Ticaret before the General Court and before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;

4. Orders Mrs Elka Zaharieva to bear her own costs.

(1) OJ C 22, 23.1.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 94/21

Judgment of the General Court of 30 January 2018 — Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej v ECHA

(Case T-625/16) (1)

((REACH - Fee payable for registration of a substance - Reduction granted to SMEs - Error in the declaration relating to the size of the undertaking - Decision imposing an administrative charge - Cessation of production of the substance - Criteria for calculation of the administrative charge - Recommendation 2003/361/EC - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Equal treatment))

(2018/C 094/27)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej sp. z o.o. (Grajewo, Poland) (represented by: T. Dobrzyński, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented initially by: E. Maurage, J.-P. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, and subsequently by: J.-P. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment, firstly, of ECHA Decision SME(2016) 2851 of 23 June 2016, finding that the applicant did not fulfil the conditions for the fee reduction provided for in respect of medium-sized enterprises and imposing an administrative charge on it; secondly, of the invoices Nos 10058238 and 10058239 issued by ECHA and annexed to Decision SME(2016) 2851; and, thirdly, of ECHA’s Management Board Decision MB/43/2014 of 4 June 2015 amending Decision MB/D/29/2010, as amended by Decision MB/21/2012 on the classification of services for which charges are levied.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Przedsiębiorstwo Energetyki Cieplnej sp. z o.o. to pay the costs, including those of the interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 142/46

Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2018 —Paulini v ECB

(Case T-764/16) (1)

((Civil service - ECB staff - Remuneration - Annual salary and bonus review - Lawfulness of the guidelines - Calculation method - Taking into account of sickness leave - Taking into account of activities of a staff representative - Principle of non-discrimination))

(2018/C 142/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Jörn Paulini (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented initially by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, subsequently by: L. Levi and A. Tymen and finally by: L. Levi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and D. Camilleri Podestà, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Action on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking, firstly, the annulment of the decision of the ECB, sent to the applicant on 15 December 2015 and amended on 10 February 2016, concerning the 2015 annual salary and bonus review and, secondly, compensation for the loss which the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Jörn Paulini to bear his own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Central Bank.

(1) OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 134/19

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2018 — CEE Bankwatch Network v Commission

(Case T-307/16) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a Commission decision on granting a Euratom loan in support of the Ukraine safety upgrade program of nuclear power units - Partial refusal of access - Exception concerning the protection of the public interest in the field of international relations - Exception concerning the protection of commercial interests - Overriding public interest - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Application to documents relating to decisions taken under the EAEC Treaty))

(2018/C 134/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CEE Bankwatch Network (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: C. Kiss, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Zadra, F. Clotuche-Duvieusart and C. Cunniffe, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: initially M. Holt and D. Robertson, and subsequently S. Brandon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 2319 final of 15 April 2016 refusing, on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), access to several documents relating to Commission Decision C(2013) 3496 final of 24 June 2013 on granting a Euratom loan in support of the Ukraine safety upgrade program of nuclear power units.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders CEE Bankwatch Network to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 305, 22.8.2016.
Case T-248/16: Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2018 — Walfood v EUIPO — Romanov Holding (CHATKA) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark CHATKA — Earlier international figurative mark CHATKA — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 25 April 2018 — Walfood v EUIPO — Romanov Holding (CHATKA)

(Case T-248/16) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark CHATKA — Earlier international figurative mark CHATKA — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Walfood SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: E. Cornu, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Romanov Holding, SL (La Moraleja, Spain) (represented by: S. García Cabezas and R. Fernández Iglesias, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 (Case R 150/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Romanov Holding and Walfood.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Walfood SA to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 161/47

Judgment of the General Court of 22 March 2018 — Stavytskyi v Council

(Case T-242/16) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Applicant’s name maintained on the list - Obligation to state reasons - Objection of illegality - Proportionality - Legal basis - Manifest error of assessment))

(2018/C 161/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Edward Stavytskyi (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J. Grayston, Solicitor, P. Gjørtler, G. Pandey and D. Rovetta, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and J.-P. Hix, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: E. Paasivirta and S. Bartelt, and subsequently by: E. Paasivirta and L. Baumgart, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application brought pursuant to Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/318 of 4 March 2016 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2016 L 60, p. 76), and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/311 of 4 March 2016 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2016 L 60, p. 1), in so far as the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Edward Stavytskyi to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.
Case T-205/16: Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2018 — Lithuania v Commission (Cohesion Fund — Expenditure excluded from financing — Technical support for Cohesion Fund management in Lithuania — VAT — Article 11(1) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 16/2003 — Reduction of financial assistance)

Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2018 — Lithuania v Commission

(Case T-205/16) ( 1 )

‛(Cohesion Fund — Expenditure excluded from financing — Technical support for Cohesion Fund management in Lithuania — VAT — Article 11(1) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 16/2003 — Reduction of financial assistance)’

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas, R. Krasuckaitė and D. Stepanienė, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B.-R. Killmann and J. Jokubauskaitė, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 969 final of 23 February 2016, concerning the reduction in support from the Cohesion Fund for the project ‘Technical assistance for Cohesion Fund management in the Republic of Lithuania’, in so far as that decision provides for a reduction in support in the amount of EUR 137864,61 corresponding to VAT expenses.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2016) 969 final of 23 February 2016, concerning the reduction in support from the Cohesion Fund for the project ‘Technical assistance for Cohesion Fund management in the Republic of Lithuania’, in so far as that decision provides for a reduction in support in the amount of EUR 137864,61 corresponding to VAT expenses;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Republic of Lithuania.

( 1 ) OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.