ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 98/30

Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2016 — Benelli Q.J. v OHIM — Demharter (MOTOBI B PESARO)

(Case T-171/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community figurative mark MOTOBI B PESARO - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Evidence submitted against the application for revocation after the expiry of the period set for that purpose - Failure to take account thereof - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Provision to the contrary - Circumstances precluding additional or supplementary evidence from being taken into account - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rule 50(1), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

(2016/C 098/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Benelli Q.J. Srl (Pesaro, Italy) (represented by: P. Lukácsi and B. Bozóki, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially F. Mattina and subsequently P. Bullock, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Demharter GmbH (Dillingen, Germany) (represented by: A. Kohn, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 January 2013 (Case R 2590/2011-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Demharter GmbH and Benelli Q.J. Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Benelli Q.J. Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 147, 25.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 59/13

Judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2015 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-275/13) (1)

((Languages - Notice of open competition for the recruitment of administrators - Choice of second language from three languages - Language of communication with the candidates to the competition - Regulation No 1 - Article 1d(1), Article 27, first paragraph, and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations - Principle of non-discrimination - Proportionality))

(2016/C 059/13)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by P. Gentili and S. Fiorentino, avvocati dello Stato)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by J. Currall, B. Eggers and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, abogado del Estado)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and B. Beutler, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of notice of open competition EPSO/AD/249/13 to draw up two reserve lists for administrations to fill vacant posts in the fields of macroeconomics and financial economics (OJ 2013 C 75 A, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Annuls the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/249/13 to draw up two reserve lists for administrations to fill vacant posts in the fields of macroeconomics and financial economics;

2) Orders the European Commission to bear, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the Italian Republic;

3) Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the Federal Republic of Germany to bear their own costs relating to their interventions.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 279/26

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2016 — Whirlpool Europe v Commission

(Case T-118/13) (1)

((Actions for annulment - State aid - Household appliances - Restructuring aid - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market, subject to compliance with certain conditions - Decision taken following the annulment by the Court of the earlier decision concerning the same procedure - Lack of individual concern - No substantial effect on the competitive position - Inadmissibility))

(2016/C 279/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Whirlpool Europe BV (Breda, Netherlands) (represented by: F. Wijckmans and H. Burez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, É. Gippini Fournier and P.-J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Electrolux AB (Stockholm, Sweden), represented by F. Wijckmans and H. Burez, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, D. Colas and J. Bousin, acting as Agents) and Fagor France SA (Rueil-Malmaison, France) (represented by: J. Derenne and A. Müller-Rappard, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision 2013/283/EU of 25 July 2012 on State aid SA.23839 (C 44/2007) that France plans to grant to FagarBrandt (OJ 2013 L 166, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Orders Whirlpool Europe BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the French Republic, Electrolux AB and Fagor France SA to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 141, 18.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 156/33

Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2016 — Nezi v OHIM — Etam (E)

(Case T-645/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark E - Earlier Community figurative mark E - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Reputation - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 156/43)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Evcharis Nezi (Mykonos, Greece) (represented by: A. Salkitzoglou, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Geroulakos and D. Botis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Etam SAS (Clichy, France) (represented by: G. Barbaut and A. Champanhet, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 October 2013 (Case R 329/2013-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Etam SAS and Mrs Evcharis Nezi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Dismisses the cross-claim;

3. Orders Mrs Evcharis Nezi and Etam SAS to each bear half of the costs of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), and to each pay their own costs.

(1) OJ C 61, 1.3.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/25

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — La Ferla v Commission and ECHA

(Case T-392/13) (1)

((REACH - Fee for registration of a substance - Reduction granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises - Error in declaration relating to the size of the enterprise - Recommendation 2003/361/EC - Decision imposing an administrative charge - Request for information - Power of the ECHA - Proportionality))

(2016/C 402/26)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Leone La Ferla SpA (Melilli, Italy) (represented by: G. Passalacqua, J. Occhipinti and G. Calcerano, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: L. Di Paolo and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents) and European Chemicals Agency (represented by: initially M. Heikkilä, A. Iber, E. Bigi, E. Maurage and J.-P. Trnka, then M. Heikkilä, E. Bigi, E. Maurage and J.-P. Trnka, acting as Agents, and by C. Garcia Molyneux, lawyer)

Re:

In the first place, application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of several Commission or ECHA measures, in the second place, application asking for the ECHA to be ordered to repay amounts which had been unduly received, and, in the third place, application based on Article 268 TFEU and seeking to obtain compensation for the harm which the applicant has allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that the action in so far as it is brought against the European Commission, is dismissed as being inadmissible;

2. Declares that the action, in so far as it is brought against the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), is dismissed as being inadmissible in part and unfounded in part;

3. Orders Leone La Ferla SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 291, 5.10.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 383/10

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2016 — Arrow Group and Arrow Generics v Commission

(Case T-467/13) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for antidepressant medicinal products containing the active pharmaceutical ingredient citalopram - Concept of restriction of competition ‘by object’ - Potential competition - Generic medicinal products - Barriers to market entry resulting from the existence of patents - Agreements concluded between a patent holder and a generic undertaking - Fines - Legal certainty - Principle that penalties must have a proper legal basis - Duration of the Commission’s investigation - Rights of the defence - Single and continuous infringement))

(2016/C 383/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Arrow Group ApS (Roskilde, Denmark) and Arrow Generics Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S.D. Kon, C. Firth and C. Humpe, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castilla Contreras and B. Mongin, acting as Agents, and by G. Peretz, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2013) 3803 final of 19 June 2013 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39226 — Lundbeck) and for reduction of the amount of the fine imposed on the applicants by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Arrow Group ApS and Arrow Generics Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 313, 26.10.2013.
Official Journal of the European Union

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

(Case T-544/13 RENV) (1)

(Directive 2010/30/EU - Indication by labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by energy-related products - Commission delegated regulation supplementing the directive - Energy labelling of vacuum cleaners - Essential element of an enabling act)

(2019/C 4/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dyson Ltd (Malmesbury, United Kingdom) (represented by: F. Carlin, Barrister, E. Batchelor and M. Healy, Solicitors, and A. Patsa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, K. Herrmann and K. Talabér-Ritz, Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 665/2013 of 3 May 2013 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to energy labelling of vacuum cleaners (OJ 2013 L 192, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 665/2013 of 3 May 2013 supplementing Directive 2010/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to energy labelling of vacuum cleaners;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings on appeal before the Court of Justice.

(1) OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 121/20

Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2017 — France v Commission

(Case T-366/13) (1)

((State aid - Maritime cabotage - Aid implemented by France in favour of the Société nationale maritime Corse Méditerranée (SNCM) and the Compagnie méridionale de navigation - Service of general economic interest - Compensation for a service additional to the basic service intended to cover peak periods during the tourist season - Decision declaring aid incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - Advantage - Altmark judgment))

(2017/C 121/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented by: initially, E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, D. Colas and N. Rouam, then G. de Bergues, D. Colas, F. Alabrune and J. Bousin, and subsequently D. Colas, F. Alabrune and J. Bousin, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Afonso and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision 2013/435/EU of 2 May 2013 on State aid SA.22843 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by France in favour of Société Nationale Maritime Corse-Méditerranée (OJ 2013 L 220, p. 20).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders the French Republic to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the European Commission, including those incurred in the interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 89/24

Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2015 — BSH v OHIM (AquaPerfect)

(Case T-123/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark AquaPerfect - Earlier Community word mark waterPerfect - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 089/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Biagosch, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Arçelik A.Ş. (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: A. Franke, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 December 2013 (Case R 314/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH and Arçelik A.Ş.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 9 December 2013 (Case R 314/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH and Arçelik A.Ş.;

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte;

3. Orders Arçelik to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 111/46

Corrigendum to the Order of the General Court of 21 January 2016 — BR IP Holder v OHIM — Greyleg Investments (HOKEY POKEY)

(Case T-62/14)

(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark HOKEY POKEY — Unregistered earlier national word mark — Proof of use — Right to prohibit use of the mark sought — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Right of a Member State — Obligation to state reasons — Raised by the Court of its own motion)

( Official Journal of the European Union C 90 of 7.3.2016, p. 15 )

(2016/C 111/58)

The OJ Communication in Case T-62/14, BR IP Holder v OHIM — Greyleg Investments (HOKEY POKEY) should read as follows:

‘Judgment of the General Court of 21 January 2016 — BR IP Holder v OHIM — Greyleg Investments (HOKEY POKEY) (Case T-62/14) (1) ((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark HOKEY POKEY - Unregistered earlier national word mark - Proof of use - Right to prohibit use of the mark sought - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Right of a Member State - Obligation to state reasons - Raised by the Court of its own motion)) (2016/C 090/20) Language of the case: English Parties Applicant: BR IP Holder LLC (Canton, Massachusetts, United States) (represented by: F. Traub, lawyer and C. Rohsler, Solicitor) Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: I. Harrington, Agent) Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Greyleg Investments Ltd (Baltonsborough, United Kingdom) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 November 2013 (Case R 1091/2012-4) relating to opposition proceedings between BR IP Holder LLC and Greyleg Investments Ltd. Operative part of the judgment The Court: 1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 22 November 2013 (Case R 1091/2012-4); 2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by BR IP Holder LLC.’

(1) OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 213/35

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Ferring v OHIM — Kora (Koragel)

(Case T-169/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Koragel - Earlier Community word mark CHORAGON - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 213/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ferring BV (Hoofddorp, Netherlands) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Kora Corp. Ltd (Swords, Ireland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 January 2014 (Case No R 721/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Ferring BV and Kora Corp. Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ferring BV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 127/26

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2015 — Universal Utility International v OHIM (Greenworld)

(Case T-106/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Greenworld - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 127/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Universal Utility International GmbH & Co.KG (Kaarst, Germany) (represented by: J. Mietzel, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Greenworld) (represented by: M. Fischer, Agent)

Re:

Action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 December 2013 (Case R 1658/2013-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Greenworld as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. The action is dismissed;

2. Universal Utility International GmbH & Co. KG is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
Case T-618/14: Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2015 — Grupo Bimbo v OHIM (Shape of a Mexican tortilla) (Community trade mark — Application for three-dimensional Community mark — Shape of a Mexican tortilla — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2015 — Grupo Bimbo v OHIM (Shape of a Mexican tortilla)

(Case T-618/14) ( 1 )

‛(Community trade mark — Application for three-dimensional Community mark — Shape of a Mexican tortilla — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)’

Parties

Applicant: Grupo Bimbo, SAB de CV (Mexico City, Mexico) (represented by N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by S. Palmero Cabezas, subsequently by J. Garrido Otaola, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 June 2014 (Case R 2449/2013-2) concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a Mexican tortilla.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Grupo Bimbo, SAB de CV to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 236/40

Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2015 — Deluxe Laboratories v OHIM (deluxe)

(Case T-222/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for figurative Community mark deluxe - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Lack of descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Lack of distinctiveness acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Duty to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 236/53)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Deluxe Laboratories, Inc. (Burbank, California, United States) (represented by: S. Serrat Viñas, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 January 2014 (Case R 1250/2013-2) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign deluxe as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 22 January 2014 (Case R 1250/2013-2);

2. Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 175, 10.6.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/32

Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a yellow background)

(Case T-143/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a yellow background - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 354/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 November 2013 (Case R 703/2013-2) relating to an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing white dots on a yellow background.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders EE Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 346/28

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2015 — Dairek Attoumi v OHIM — Diesel (DIESEL)

(Case T-278/14) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design DIESEL - Earlier international word mark DIESEL - Ground for invalidity - Use of a distinctive sign - Likelihood of confusion - Article 25(1)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Proof of genuine use - Stay of the administrative proceedings))

(2015/C 346/32)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Mansour Dairek Attoumi (Badalona, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina and J. Manresa Medina, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño and V. Melgar, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Diesel SpA (Breganze, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica and F. Fischetti, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 February 2014 (Case R 855/2012-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Diesel SpA and Mansour Dairek Attoumi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mansour Dairek Attoumi to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.