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

Judgment of the General Court of 28 May 2020 —Lozano Arana and Others v EUIPO — Coltejer (LIBERTADOR)

(Case T-564/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark LIBERTADOR - Genuine use of the mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001 - Due notification - Article 60 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430 (now Article 60 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Failure to produce proof of genuine use of the mark within the time limit prescribed - Article 19(1) of Delegated Regulation 2017/1430 (now Article 19(1) of Delegated Regulation 2018/625)

(2020/C 230/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Antonio Lozano Arana (Cali, Colombia), Daniel Simon Benmaor (Marseilles, France), Marion Esther Benmaor (Marseilles), Valérie Brigitte Danielle Servant (Marrakesh, Morocco) (represented by: M. Angelier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Coltejer SA (Itagüí, Colombia)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 June 2019 (Case R 2482/2018-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Coltejer and Mr Albert Benmaor and Mr Lozano Arana.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Antonio Lozano Arana, Mr Daniel Simon Benmaor, Ms Marion Esther Benmaor and Ms Valérie Brigitte Danielle Servant to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 337, 7.10.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Teva Pharmaceutical Industries v EUIPO (Weniger Migräne. Mehr vom Leben.)

(Case T-697/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Weniger Migräne. Mehr vom Leben. - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 339/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Petah Tikva, Israel) (represented by: J. Bogatz and Y. Stone, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 August 2019 (Case R 779/2019-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign Weniger Migräne. Mehr vom Leben. as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.
1.

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 December 2018 (Case R-580/2018-2), in so far as it refused registration as an EU trade mark of the figurative sign OFF-WHITE in respect of the goods in Classes 9 and 20 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, and for ‘watches; wall clocks; horological and chronometric instruments; watch bands; watch cases; presentation boxes for watches; jewelry cases’ and ‘precious stones, semi-precious stones’ in Class 14;
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Aldi v EUIPO (BBQ BARBECUE SEASON)

(Case T-522/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark BBQ BARBECUE SEASON - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 390/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and M. Minkner, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 May 2019 (Case R 1359/2018-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign BBQ BARBECUE SEASON as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 305, 9.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — Gothe and Kunz v EUIPO — Aldi Einkauf (FAIR ZONE)

(Case T-589/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark FAIR ZONE - Earlier EU word mark FAIR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 378/37)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Oliver Gothe (Cologne, Germany) and Martin Kunz (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: K. Kruse, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen, and M. Minkner, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the EUIPO of 3 July 2019 (Case R 2253/2018-4), concerning opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, Aldi Einkauf and, on the other hand, Mr Gothe and Mr Kunz.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. The action is dismissed;

2. Mr Oliver Gothe and Mr Martin Kunz are ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 337, 7.10.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — nanoPET Pharma v EUIPO — Miltenyi Biotec (viscover)

(Case T-264/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark viscover - Absence of bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001) - Article 53(2)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 60(2)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2020/C 414/55)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: nanoPET Pharma GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: C. Onken and A. Schulz, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Miltenyi Biotec BV & Co. KG, formerly Miltenyi Biotec GmbH (Bergisch Gladbach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schork, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 January 2019 (Case R 1288/2017-5), concerning invalidity proceedings between nanoPET Pharma and Miltenyi Biotec.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders nanoPET Pharma GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Brillux v EUIPO — Synthesa Chemie (Freude an Farbe)

(Case T-401/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Freude an Farbe in yellow, orange, red, pink, violet, blue, turquoise, dark green, light green and anthracite - Earlier figurative EU trade mark Glemadur Freude an Farbe - Relative grounds 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))

(2020/C 399/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Brillux GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany) (represented by: R. Schiffer, 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: Synthesa Chemie GesmbH (Perg, Austria) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2019 (Case R 1498/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Synthesa Chemie and Brillux.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 November 2020 — AV and AW v Parliament

(Case T-173/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Reimbursement of medical expenses - OLAF investigation - Article 85 of the Staff Regulations - Recovery of undue payments)

(2021/C 9/21)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: AV and AW (represented by: L. Levi, S. Rodrigues and J. Martins, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: T. Lazian and I. Lázaro Betancor, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decisions of the Parliament of 23 July and 1 August 2018 recovering from one applicant the sum of EUR 5 289 and from the other applicant the sum of EUR 3 880, on the ground of undue payment having been made to them as reimbursement of medical expenses.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court hereby:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2020 — Decathlon v EUIPO — Athlon Custom Sportswear (athlon custom sportswear)

(Case T-349/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark athlon custom sportswear - Earlier EU word mark DECATHLON - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 433/56)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Decathlon (Villeneuve-d’Ascq, France) (represented by: A. Cléry and C. Devernay, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Athlon Custom Sportswear PC (Kallithea, Greece)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2019 (Case R 1724/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Decathlon and Athlon Custom Sportswear.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Decathlon to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 29.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2020 — GV v Commission

(Case T-705/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Psychological harassment - Request for assistance - Rejection of the request - Interests of the service - Equivalence of posts - Reasonable period - Absence of prima facie evidence - Responsibility)

(2021/C 35/60)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: GV (represented by: B.-H. Vincent, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin, M. Brauhoff and T. Lilamand, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Commission of 5 February 2019 rejecting the applicant's request for assistance and, second, compensation for the physical and psychological harm that the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders GV to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2020 — BRF Singapore Foods v EUIPO — Tipiak (SADIA)

(Case T-310/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SADIA - Earlier national word mark SAIDA - 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) - Principle of sound administration - Equal treatment - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 28/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BRF Singapore Foods Pte Ltd (Singapore, Singapore) (represented by: C. Mateu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Lapinskaite, 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: Tipiak (Saint-Aignan de Grand-Lieu, France) (represented by: M. Antoine-Lalance and M. Aïtelli, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 March 2019 (Case R 1857/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Tipiak and BRF Singapore Foods.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BRF Singapore Foods Pte Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Tipiak;

3. Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Stada Arzneimittel v EUIPO — Optima Naturals (OptiMar)

(Case T-261/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark OptiMar - Earlier national word mark Mar - Relative ground for refusal - No 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 72/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stada Arzneimittel AG (Bad Vilbel, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, 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, intervener before the General Court: Optima Naturals Srl (Gallarate, Italy) (represented by: S. Brustia and E. Montelione, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 January 2019 (Case R 1348/2018-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Stada Arzneimittel and Optima Naturals.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Stada Arzneimittel AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Production Christian Gallimard v EUIPO — Éditions Gallimard (PCG CALLIGRAM CHRISTIAN GALLIMARD)

(Case T-863/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark PCG CALLIGRAM CHRISTIAN GALLIMARD - Previous EU word marks GALLIMARD - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Conceptual comparison - Surnames - Independent distinctive role - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 53/51)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Production Christian Gallimard (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: L. Dreyfuss-Bechmann, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Éditions Gallimard la nouvelle revue française éditions de la nouvelle revue française SA (Paris, France) (represented by: J.-A. Bénazéraf and Y. Diringer, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 October 2019 (Case R-2316/2018-5) regarding opposition proceedings between Éditions Gallimard la nouvelle revue française éditions de la nouvelle revue française and Production Christian Gallimard.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Production Christian Gallimard to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

3. Orders Éditions Gallimard la nouvelle revue française éditions de la nouvelle revue française SA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Boshab v Council

(Case T-111/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - 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 - Right to property - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 98/20)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Évariste Boshab (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: J.-P. Hix, H. Marcos Fraile, S. Van Overmeire and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 134, p. 47) and, second, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018 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 2018 L 314, 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 Évariste Boshab to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Palírna U Zeleného stromu v EUIPO — Bacardi (BLEND 42 VODKA)

(Case T-830/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark BLEND 42 VODKA - Earlier EU word mark and international figurative mark 42 BELOW - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Relevant public - Similarity of the goods and services - Similarity of the signs - Global assessment of the 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 88/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Palírna U Zeleného stromu a.s. (Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic) (represented by: T. Chleboun, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bacardi & Co. Ltd (Meyrin, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Parassina, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2019 (Case R 2532/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Bacardi & Co. and Palírna U Zeléného stromu.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Palírna U Zeleného stromu a.s. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2021 — Bennahmias v Parliament

(Case T-799/19) (1)

(Institutional law - Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid - Burden of proof - Obligation to state reasons - Error of law - Error of fact - Proportionality)

(2021/C 217/53)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Jean-Luc Bennahmias (Marseille, France) (represented by: J.-M. Rikkers, J.-L. Teheux, M. Ganilsy and C. De Kuyper, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Lorenz and M. Ecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 16 September 2019 concerning the recovery from the applicant of a sum of EUR 15 105 unduly paid as parliamentary assistance allowance and the debit note of 19 September 2019 relating thereto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Jean-Luc Bennahmias to bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Parliament.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2021 — EM v Parliament

(Case T-599/19) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Psychological harassment - Request for assistance - Rejection of the request - Retirement - Duty to provide assistance - Principle of sound administration - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff)

(2021/C 148/21)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: D. Boytha, C. González Argüelles and T. Lazian, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the Parliament’s decision of 31 October 2018 rejecting the applicant’s request for assistance, as confirmed by the decision of 24 May 2019 rejecting his complaint and, secondly, compensation for the material and non-material harm which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 28 April 2021 — Correia v EESC

(Case T-843/19) (1)

(Civil service - EESC staff - Members of the temporary staff - Refusal to regrade - Action for annulment - Time limit for complaints - Burden of proving expiry of the time limit - Act adversely affecting an official - Admissibility - Equal treatment - Legal certainty - Action for damages - Non-material damage)

(2021/C 242/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Paula Correia (Sint-Stevens-Woluwe, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Defendant: European Economic and Social Committee (represented by: M. Pascua Mateo, X. Chamodraka and K. Gambino, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the EESC adopted on a date unknown to the applicant, which the applicant became aware of on 12 April 2019, refusing to regrade her in grade AST 7 in the 2019 regrading process and, secondly, compensation for the non-material damage suffered by the applicant on account of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) refusing to regrade Mrs Paula Correia in the 2019 regrading process;

2. Orders the EESC to pay Mrs Correia the sum of EUR 2 000 in respect of the non-material damage she suffered;

3. Orders the EESC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.