ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — Alfa Acciai v Commission

(Case T-656/19) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for reinforcing bars - Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Fixing of prices - Limiting and controlling output and sales - Decision adopted following the annulment of earlier decisions - New hearing in the presence of the competition authorities of the Member States - Rights of the defence - Principle of sound administration - Reasonable period - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 482/20)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Alfa Acciai SpA (Brescia, Italy) (represented by: D. Fosselard, D. Slater and G. Carnazza, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi, G. Conte and C. Sjödin, acting as Agents, and P. Manzini, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 4969 final of 4 July 2019 relating to a proceeding under Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty (Case AT.37956 — Reinforcing bars), in so far as it finds that the applicant infringed that provision and imposes upon it a fine of EUR 3,587 million.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Alfa Acciai SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium v Commission

(Case T-642/19) (1)

(State aid - Aid implemented by Belgium in favour of JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Advantage - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 398/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Winckler, G. Babin and B. Cambier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz, C. Georgieva and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Clear Channel Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. de Bandt, M. Gherghinaru and L. Panepinto, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 4466 final of 24 June 2019 on State aid SA.33078 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by Belgium in favour of JC Decaux Belgium Publicité.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders Clear Channel Belgium to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2021 — EAB v EUIPO (RADIOSHUTTLE)

(Case T-341/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark RADIOSHUTTLE - Absolute ground for refusal - Not distinctive - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Restriction of the goods designated in the trade mark application)

(2021/C 110/34)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: EAB AB (Smålandsstenar, Sweden) (represented by: J. Norderyd and C. Sundén lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. von Schantz and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 March 2020 (Case R 1428/2019-1) regarding an application for registration of the word mark RADIOSHUTTLE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders EAB AB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2020 — Almea v EUIPO — Sanacorp Pharmahandel (Almea)

(Case T-190/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Almea - Earlier national word mark MEA - 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))

(2021/C 35/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Almea Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Furneaux and E. Humphreys, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Mrozowski, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Sanacorp Pharmahandel GmbH (Planegg, Germany) (represented by: I. M. Helbig, S. Rengshausen and S. Cobet-Nüse, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 January 2020 (Case R 246/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Sanacorp Pharmahandel and Almea.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Almea Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2021 — Ryanair v Commission (SAS, Denmark; COVID-19)

(Case T-378/20) (1)

(State aid - Danish air transport market - Aid granted by Denmark to an airline amid the COVID-19 pandemic - Guarantee - Decision not to raise any objections - Commitments as a condition to make the aid compatible with the internal market - Aid intended to make good the damage caused by an exceptional occurrence - Freedom of establishment - Free provision of services - Equal treatment - Duty to state reasons)

(2021/C 242/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: E. Vahida, F.C. Laprévote, S. Rating, I.G. Metaxas-Maranghidis and V. Blanc, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Tomat, L. Flynn and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: J. Nymann-Lindegren and M. Søndahl Wolff, acting as Agents, and by R. Holdgaard, lawyer), French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), SAS AB (Stockholm, Sweden) (represented by: F. Sjövall, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 2416 final of 15 April 2020 on State Aid SA.56795 (2020/N) — Denmark — Compensation for the damage caused by the COVID-19 outbreak to Scandinavian Airlines.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission, including the costs relating to the request for confidential treatment;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Denmark, the French Republic and SAS AB to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 February 2021 — Bezos Family Foundation v EUIPO — SNCF Mobilités (VROOM)

(Case T-56/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark VROOM - Earlier national word mark POP & VROOM - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 163/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bezos Family Foundation (Seattle, Washington, United States) (represented by: A. Klett, M. Schaffner and M. Lambert Maillard, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: SNCF Mobilités, établissement public à caractère industriel et commercial (Saint-Denis, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 November 2019 (Case R 1288/2019 5), relating to opposition proceedings between SNCF Mobilités and Bezos Family Foundation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bezos Family Foundation to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2021 — Tornado Boats International v EUIPO — Haygreen (TORNADO)

(Case T-167/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Figurative EU mark TORNADO - Absolute ground for invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 252/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tornado Boats International ApS (Lystrup, Denmark) (represented by: M. Hoffgaard Rasmussen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: David Haygreen (Colwyn Bay, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Harrison, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 January 2020 (Case R 1169/2018-1), relating to proceedings for a declaration of invalidity between Mr Haygreen and Tornado Boats International.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tornado Boats International ApS to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

3. Orders Mr David Haygreen to bear his own costs.

(1) OJ C 175, 25.5.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 April 2021 — Hell Energy Magyarország v EUIPO (HELL)

(Case T-323/20) (1)

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

(2021/C 242/54)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Hell Energy Magyarország Kft. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Á. László and B. Mező, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Kondás and P. Sipos, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2020 (Case R 1712/2019-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign HELL as an EU trade mark.

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 25 March 2020 (Case R 1712/2019-2);

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 240, 20.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — KT v EIB

(Case T-415/20) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Disciplinary proceedings - Summary dismissal for grave misconduct - Rights of the defence - Hearing of witnesses - Delegation of power - Preparation of the contested decision - Reasonable period of time - Impartiality - Protection of personal data - Proportionality)

(2021/C 310/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: KT (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: K. Carr and M. Loizou, acting as Agents, and by A. Duron, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking the annulment of the decision of the EIB of 24 March 2020 imposing on the applicant, as a disciplinary penalty, summary dismissal for grave misconduct, without notice and with a severance grant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders KT to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Investment Bank (EIB).

(1) OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 June 2021 — adp Gauselmann v EUIPO — Gameloft (GAMELAND)

(Case T-17/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark GAMELAND - Earlier EU word mark Gameloft - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Restriction of the services covered in the trade mark application)

(2021/C 278/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Espelkamp, Germany) (represented by: K. Mandel, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Gameloft SE (Paris, France) (represented by M. Decker, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 November 2019 (Case R 2502/2018 5) relating to opposition proceedings between Gameloft and adp Gauselmann.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders adp Gauselmann GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 July 2021 — Micron Technology v EUIPO (INTELLIGENCE, ACCELERATED)

(Case T-386/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark INTELLIGENCE, ACCELERATED - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 338/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Micron Technology, Inc. (Boise, Idaho, United States) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 April 2020 (Case R 2873/2019-1), relating to an application for registration of the word sign INTELLIGENCE, ACCELERATED as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Micron Technology, Inc., to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 271, 17.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Ceramica Flaminia v EUIPO — Ceramica Cielo (goclean)

(Case T-290/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark goclean - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 52(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 52(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 329/34)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Ceramica Flaminia SpA (Civita Castellana, Italy) (represented by: A. Improda and R. Arista, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ceramica Cielo SpA (Fabrica di Roma, Italy) (represented by: L. Ghedina, L. Gyulai and E. Fassina, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2020 (Case R 991/2018-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Ceramica Cielo and Ceramica Flaminia.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ceramica Flaminia SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 222, 6.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Ryanair and Laudamotion v Commission (Austrian Airlines; Covid-19)

(Case T-677/20) (1)

(State aid - Austrian air transport market - Aid granted by Austria to an airline amid the COVID-19 pandemic - Subordinated loan to Austrian Airlines - Decision not to raise any objections - Aid previously granted to the parent company of the recipient - Aid intended to make good the damage caused by an exceptional occurrence - Freedom of establishment - Free provision of services - Equal treatment - Duty to state reasons)

(2021/C 368/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland), Laudamotion GmbH, (Schwechat, Austria) (represented by: E. Vahida, F.-C. Laprévote, V. Blanc, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, F. Tomat and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendants: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: R. Kanitz, J. Möller and P.-L. Krüger, acting as Agents), Republic of Austria (represented by: A. Posch, J. Schmoll, G. Eberhard and S. Weber, acting as Agents), Austrian Airlines AG, (Vienna, Austria), (represented by: A. Zellhofer, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 4684 final of 6 July 2020 on State aid SA.57539 (2020/N) — Austria — COVID-19 — Aid to Austrian Airlines.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ryanair DAC and Laudamotion GmbH to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Austria and Austrian Airlines AG to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Guerlain v EUIPO (Shape of an oblong, tapered and cylindrical lipstick)

(Case T-488/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for registration of a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of an oblong, tapered and cylindrical lipstick - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 349/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Guerlain (Paris, France) (represented by: T. de Haan, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Pétrequin, A. Folliard-Monguiral and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2020 (Case R 2292/2019-1), relating to an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting in the shape of an oblong, tapered and cylindrical lipstick as an EU trade mark.

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 2 June 2020 (Case R 2292/2019-1);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Guerlain for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

(1) OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — Qx World v EUIPO — Mandelay (EDUCTOR)

(Case T-85/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark EDUCTOR - Earlier non-registered mark EDUCTOR - Article 53(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Article 71(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 72(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 16(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Article 6bis of the Paris Convention)

(2021/C 452/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Qx World Kft. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Á. László and A. Cserny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. (Mandelay Kft.) (Szigetszentmiklós, Hungary) (represented by: V. Luszcz, C. Sár and É. Ulviczki, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2019 (Case R 1311/2019-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Qx World and Mandelay.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 December 2019;

2. Orders Qx World Kft., EUIPO and Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. (Mandelay Kft.) each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 114, 6.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — SBG v EUIPO — VF International (GEOGRAPHICAL NORWAY EXPEDITION)

(Case T-459/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark GEOGRAPHICAL NORWAY EXPEDITION - Absolute ground for refusal - Absolute ground for invalidity - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 431/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Super Brand Licencing (SBG) (Villeurbanne, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and A. Sion, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: VF International Sagl (Stabio, Switzerland) (represented by: T. van Innis and A. Van der Planken, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 April 2020 (Case R 664/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between VF International and SBG.

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 6 April 2020 (Case R 664/2019-1);

2. Orders EUIPO and VF International Sagl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 –Mutondo v Council

(Case T-103/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons subject to restrictive measures - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 452/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Kalev Mutondo (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: H. Marcos Fraile and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 134), and, second, Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 1) in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Kalev Mutondo to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.