ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2022 — TK v Commission

(Case T-435/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2020 promotion exercise - Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 15 - Comparing merits - Equal treatment - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 284/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: TK (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Brauhoff and L. Hohenecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment, first, of the decision of the European Commission of 18 November 2020 not to include his name on the list of officials promoted to grade AD 15 under the 2020 promotion exercise and, second, of the decisions to promote to grade AD 15 officials belonging to the Senior Management Staff promoted under the 2020 promotion exercise.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders TK and the European Commission to each bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 349, 30.8.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Bodegas Beronia v EUIPO — Bodegas Carlos Serres (ALEGRA DE BERONIA)

(Case T-298/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ALEGRA DE BERONIA - Earlier national word mark ALEGRO - Relative ground for refusal - Lack of likelihood of confusion - Article 8(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 257/43)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Bodegas Beronia (Ollauri, Spain) (represented by: J. Mora Cortés, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Raponi and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Bodegas Carlos Serres, SL (Haro, Spain) (represented by: F. Pérez Álvarez and J. Pérez Itarte, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 March 2021 (Case R 2013/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Bodegas Carlos Serres and Bodegas Beronia.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 March 2021 (Case R 2013/2020-1);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs as well as pay half of the costs of Bodegas Beronia, SA, including half the costs necessarily incurred by them for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;

3. Orders Bodegas Carlos Serres, SL, to bear its own costs as well as pay half the costs of Bodegas Beronia, including half the costs necessarily incurred by them for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

(1) OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — YF v EFCA

(Case T-664/21) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Contract for an indefinite period - Termination of contract - Incompetence - Manifest error of assessment - Principle of good administration)

(2022/C 340/54)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: YF (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Fisheries Control Agency (represented by: S. Steele, acting as Agent, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) of 18 February 2021 by which his contract of indefinite duration was terminated.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders YF to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 502, 13.12.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Future Motion v EUIPO — El Corte Inglés (HYPERCORE)

(Case T-356/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark HYPERCORE - Earlier EU figurative mark HIPERCOR - 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))

(2022/C 303/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Future Motion, Inc. (Santa Cruz, California, United States) (represented by: F.-M. Orou, 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 General Court: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2021 (Case R 1229/2020 1), relating to opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés and Future Motion.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 April 2021 (Case R 1229/2020-1);

2. Orders EUIPO, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by Future Motion, Inc.;

3. Orders El Corte Inglés, SA, to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Peace United v EUIPO — 1906 Collins (MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN)

(Case T-699/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN - Declaration of revocation - Absence of genuine use of the mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use - Abuse of rights)

(2022/C 418/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Peace United Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Artzimovitch, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: 1906 Collins LLC (Miami, Florida, United States) (represented by: C. Mateu, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 July 2021 (Case R 276/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Peace United Ltd to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — CCTY Bearing Company v EUIPO — CCVI International (CCTY)

(Case T-176/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark CCTY - Earlier EU figurative mark CCVI - 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) - Misuse of rights - Article 71 of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 359/79)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CCTY Bearing Company (Zhenjiang, China) (represented by: L. Genz and C. Stadler, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: CCVI International Srl (Vicenza, Italy) (represented by: D. Demarinis, R. Covelli and M. Theisen, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 3 February 2021 (Case R 779/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders CCTY Bearing Company to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 206, 31.5.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt)

(Case T-706/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 432/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Okan Balaban (Bornheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Schaaf, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez and M. Eberl, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment in part and the variation of the examiner’s decision of 27 August 2020 and of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 September 2021 (Case R 1987/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Okan Balaban to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Völkl v EUIPO — Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) (Völkl)

(Case T-155/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Völkl - Earlier EU word mark Völkl - Earlier EU word mark VÖLKL - Relative ground for invalidity - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the goods - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 418/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Völkl GmbH & Co. KG (Erding, Germany) (represented by: C. Raßmann, M. Suether and F. Adinolfi, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) GmbH (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Bauer, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 11 January 2021 (Case R 568/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — bett1.de v EUIPO — XXXLutz Marken (BODY STAR)

(Case T-537/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark BODY STAR - Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard - Earlier national word mark Bodyguard - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 463/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: bett1.de GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: O. Brexl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis and M. Eberl, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: XXXLutz Marken GmbH (Wels, Austria) (represented by: H. Pannen, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 June 2021 (Joined Cases R 1711/2020-2 and R 1727/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 June 2021 (Joined Cases R 1711/2020-2 et R 1727/2020-2) as regards ‘mattresses; mattress toppers; beds; bed frames; slatted bases for beds; bedding except linen; cushions; pillows; neck-supporting pillows; waterbeds, not for medical purposes; air mattresses’ in Class 20 and ‘bed blankets; bed linen and blankets; ticks [mattress covers]; mattress covers; ticks (mattress and pillow coverings); sleeping bags’ in Class 24;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Itinerant Show Room v EUIPO — Save the Duck (ITINERANT)

(Case T-416/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ITINERANT - Earlier EU figurative mark representing a singing duck in a circle - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Similarity - Reputation - Link - Undue advantage - Lack of due cause - Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Document produced for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 432/27)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Itinerant Show Room Srl (San Giorgio in Bosco, Italy) (represented by: E. Montelione, 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: Save the Duck SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. De Vietro, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 May 2021 (Case R 997/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between the intervener and the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Itinerant Show Room Srl to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office and by Save the Duck SpA.

(1) OJ C 357, 6.9.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Sistem ecologica v Commission

(Case T-81/21) (1)

(Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 - Investigation into evasion of the conventional, countervailing and anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of biodiesel into the European Union - OLAF Communication to national customs authorities - OLAF investigation report - Action for annulment - Act not open to challenge - Claim for compensation - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)

(2022/C 472/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant:‘Sistem ecologica’ production, trade and services d.o.o. Srbac (Srbac, Bosnia and Herzegovina) (represented by: D. Diris, D. Rjabynina, C. Kocks and C. Verheyen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and T. Materne, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Articles 263 and 268 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the final investigation report adopted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on 8 December 2020 and of OLAF’s decisions contained in a communication sent on 9 June 2020 to the Member States, in letters of 25 and 27 November 2020 and in letters of 8 and 21 December 2020 and, second, compensation in respect of the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ‘Sistem ecologica’ production, trade and services d.o.o. Srbac to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 163, 3.5.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — Associação do Socorro e Amparo v EUIPO — De Bragança (quis ut Deus)

(Case T-752/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark quis ut Deus - Lack of genuine use of the mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 463/57)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Associação do Socorro e Amparo (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: J. Motta Veiga, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: I. Ribeiro da Cunha and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Duarte Pio De Bragança (Sintra, Portugal)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 October 2021 (Case R 581/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 October 2021 (Case R 581/2021-4) in so far as it annulled in part the decision of the Cancellation Division of 29 January 2021;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Associação do Socorro e Amparo.

(1) OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — CB v EUIPO — China Construction Bank (CCB)

(Case T-639/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark CCB - Earlier EU figurative mark CB - Earlier international registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark CB - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Reputation and enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2023/C 15/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Groupement des cartes bancaires (CB) (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Herissay Ducamp, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: China Construction Bank Corp. (Beijing, China) (represented by: C. Gommers, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 July 2021 (Case R 1305/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Groupement des cartes bancaires (CB) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 481, 29.11.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Castel Frères v EUIPO — Shanghai Panati (Representation of Chinese characters)

(Case T-323/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark representing Chinese characters - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Alteration of the distinctive character)

(2023/C 7/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Castel Frères (Blanquefort, France) (represented by: T. de Haan, 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: Shanghai Panati Co. (Shanghai, China)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 March 2021 (Case R 753/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Castel Frères to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 310, 2.8.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2022 — ADS L. Kowalik, B. Włodarczyk v EUIPO — ESSAtech (Accessory for wireless remote control)

(Case T-611/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an accessory for wireless remote control - Ground for invalidity - Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function - Article 8(1) and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 41(1) and (2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)

(2023/C 45/24)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: ADS L. Kowalik, B. Włodarczyk s.c. (Sosnowiec, Poland) (represented by: M. Oleksyn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Chylińska and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: ESSAtech (Přistoupim, Czech Republic)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 5 July 2021 (Case R 1070/2020-3).

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 5 July 2021 (Case R 1070/2020-3);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs incurred in the proceedings both before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO and before the Court.

(1) OJ C 502, 13.12.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2022 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL3TOTAL)

(Case T-678/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark VSL3TOTAL - Earlier EU word mark VSL#3 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the goods - 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))

(2023/C 35/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mendes SA (Lugano, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Cavattoni, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Actial Farmaceutica Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: M. Mostardini, F. Mellucci and F. Rombolà, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 17 August 2021 (Case R 1568/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mendes SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 502, 13.12.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2022 — Sanetview v EUIPO — 2boca2catering (Las Cebras)

(Case T-159/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Las Cebras - Earlier national figurative mark LEZEBRA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2023/C 35/73)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Sanetview, SLU (Andorra la Vella, Andorra) (represented by: J. Gallego Jiménez, E. Sanz Valls, P. Bauzá Martínez, Y. Hernández Viñes and C. Marí Aguilar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Crawcour Hage and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: 2boca2catering, SL (Seville, Spain)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFUE, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 January 2022 (Case R 1070/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sanetview, SLU to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 233/21

Order of the Court of First Instance of 23 July 2009 — Bouma and Others v Council and Commission

(Case T-533/93) (1)

2009/C 233/39

Language of the case: Dutch

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

(1) OJ C 334, 9.12.1993.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/50

Order of the Court of 7 January 2010 — van Hest v Council and Commission

(Case T-11/98) (1)

2010/C 63/88

Language of the case: Dutch

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

(1) OJ C 72, 7.3.1998.