ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 2 December 2020 — Thunus and Others v EIB

(Case T-318/19) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Remuneration - Annual salary adjustment - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Staff consultation - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality)

(2021/C 35/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Vincent Thunus (Contern, Luxembourg) and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: T. Gilliams, J. Klein and J. Krueck, acting as Agents, and by P.-E. Partsch, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union (i) seeking annulment of the decisions contained in the applicants’ pay slips for the month of February 2019 and the subsequent months, applying the decision of the EIB’s Board of Directors of 18 July 2017 defining a new approach to the overall increase in staff salaries applicable to all EIB staff members, the decision of the Board of Directors of 11 December 2018 setting the salary budget for 2019 and the decision of the EIB’s Management Committee of 30 January 2019 fixing the adjustment rate of salaries for the year 2019 to 0,8 %, and (ii) seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr. Vincent Thunus and the other applicants whose names are set out in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Investment Bank (EIB).

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

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2020 — Kerangus v EUIPO (ΑΠΛΑ!)

(Case T-882/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark ΑΠΛΑ! - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Equal treatment)

(2021/C 28/69)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Kerangus Holdings Ltd (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: A.-E. Malami, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 October 2019 (Case R 1035/2017-1), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign ΑΠΛΑ! as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kerangus Holdings Ltd to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 13 January 2021 — RY v Commission

(Case T-824/19) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Termination of a contract of indefinite duration pursuant to Article 47(c)(i) of the CEOS - Compliance with a judgment of the General Court - Article 266 TFEU - Right to be heard - New termination decision)

(2021/C 72/33)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: RY (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Schima and B. Mongin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Commission of 10 April 2019 terminating the applicant’s contract of indefinite duration.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders RY to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 36, 3.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Gustopharma Consumer Health v EUIPO — Helixor Heilmittel (HELIX ELIXIR)

(Case T-883/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark HELIX ELIXIR - Earlier EU word mark HELIXOR - 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 53/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Gustopharma Consumer Health, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: A. Gómez López and J. Mora Cortés, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Helixor Heilmittel GmbH (Rosenfeld, Germany) (represented by: J. Klink, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2019 (Case R 100/2019-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Helixor Heilmittel and Gustopharma Consumer Health.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gustopharma Consumer Health, SL, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2021 — Şanli v Council

(Case T-157/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism - Freezing of funds - List of the persons, groups and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 110/30)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Dalokay Şanli (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: D. Gürses and J. M. Langenberg, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Van Overmeire and B. Driessen, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Bulterman, J. Langer and J. Hoogveld, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/25 of 8 January 2019 amending and updating the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2018/1084 (OJ 2019 L 6, p. 6), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/24 of 8 January 2019 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1071 (OJ 2019 L 6, p. 2) in so far as they concern the applicant and, second, application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of those measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/25 of 8 January 2019 amending and updating the list of persons, groups and entities subject to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2018/1084, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/24 of 8 January 2019 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1071, in so far as they concern Mr Dalokay Şanli;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Şanli;

4. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Amisi Kumba v Council

(Case T-118/19) (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 - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 98/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Gabriel Amisi Kumba (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 Gabriel Amisi Kumba to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — Acron and Others v Commission

(Case T-45/19) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia - Request for partial interim review - Termination of the partial interim review - No change of circumstances - Error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence)

(2021/C 242/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Acron PAO (Veliky Novgorod, Russia), Dorogobuzh PAO (Dorogobuzh, Russia), Acron Switzerland AG (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: T. De Meese, J. Stuyck and M. Van Nieuwenborgh, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Gustafsson and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Fertilizers Europe (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: B. O’Connor, Solicitor)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1703 of 12 November 2018 terminating the partial interim review concerning imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia (OJ 2018 L 285, p. 97).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Acron PAO, Dorogobuzh PAO and Acron Switzerland AG to bear, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the European Commission and by Fertilizers Europe.

(1) OJ C 122, 1.4.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 10 March 2021 — AM v EIB

(Case T-134/19) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Remuneration - Admissibility - Time limit for submitting a request to initiate the conciliation procedure - Act adversely affecting an official - Geographical mobility allowance - Transfer to an external office - Refusal to grant the allowance - Action for annulment and for damages)

(2021/C 189/18)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: AM (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB) (represented by: G. Faedo and M. Loizou, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and on Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, the annulment of the decisions of the EIB of 30 June and 11 December 2017 and, in so far as necessary, of the decision of the President of the EIB of 20 November 2018 confirming those decisions, by which it refused to grant the applicant the geographical mobility allowance and, second, compensation for the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant further to those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 30 June and 11 December 2017 in so far as they refuse AM the geographical mobility allowance;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the EIB to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by AM.

(1) OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2021 — DF and DG v EIB

(Case T-387/19) (1)

(Civil service - Staff of the EIB - Remuneration - Decision refusing entitlement to an installation allowance upon return to headquarters - Liability)

(2021/C 263/22)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: DF and DG (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: M. Loizou and K. Carr, acting as Agents, and J. Currall and B. Wägenbaur, lawyers)

Re:

ACTION brought under Article 270 TFUE and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and seeking, first, the annulment (i) of the EIB’s decisions of 6 March 2018 and 28 February 2019 not to grant the applicants the benefit of an installation allowance, (ii) of the EIB’s decisions of 19 and 27 March 2019 confirming the decision not to grant the installation allowance, and rejecting their request to launch a conciliation procedure, (iii) of the EIB’s decisions of 14 June 2019 confirming the decision not to grant the installation allowance and, second, compensation for harm allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

(1) Annuls the decisions of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 6 March 2018 and 19 March 2019 not to grant DF the payment of the installation allowance provided for in Article 5 of Annex VII to the EIB Staff Rules.

(2) Annuls the decisions of the EIB of 28 February and 27 March 2019 not to grant DG the payment of the installation allowance provided for in Article 5 of Annex VII to the EIB Staff Rules.

(3) Orders the EIB to pay to DF and DG, subject to the calculation of the amounts, the installation allowance provided for in Articles 5 and 17 of Annex VII to the EIB Staff Rules, increased by late interest, from the date of delivery of this judgment, calculated at the level of the European Central Bank (ECB) rate plus two points, until the date of payment in full by the EIB.

(4) Dismisses the action for the remainder.

(5) Orders the EIB to bear the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2021 — Achema and Lifosa v Commission

(Case T-300/19) (1)

(State aid - Market in electricity generated from renewable energy sources - Operating aid - Decision declaring the aid scheme compatible with the internal market at the end of the preliminary examination stage - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - Infringement of procedural rights - 2008 Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection - 2014 Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020 - Article 30 TFEU - Article 110 TFEU - Body of consistent evidence)

(2021/C 242/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Achema AB (Jonava, Lithuania), Lifosa AB (Kedainiai, Lithuania) (represented by: E. Righini and N. Solárová, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: K. Dieninis and R. Dzikovič, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 9209 final of 8 January 2019 on State aid SA.45765 (2018/NN), concerning an aid scheme implemented by the Republic of Lithuania in support of producers of electricity from renewable energy sources (OJ 2019 C 61, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2018) 9209 final of 8 January 2019 on State aid SA.45765 (2018/NN), concerning an aid scheme implemented by the Republic of Lithuania in support of producers of electricity from renewable energy sources;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Achema AB and Lifosa AB;

3. Orders the Republic of Lithuania to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 238, 15.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Cyprus v EUIPO — Filotas Bellas & Yios (Halloumi Vermion)

(Case T-281/19 and T-351/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Halloumi χαλλούμι Vermion grill cheese M BELAS PREMIUM GREEK DAIRY SINCE 1927 - Earlier national certification word marks ΧΑΛΛΟΥΜΙ HALLOUMI - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Relative ground for invalidity - Article 53(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 310/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Cyprus (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, S. Baran, Barrister, and V. Marsland, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Filotas Bellas & Yios AE (Alexandreia Imathias, Greece)

Re:

Actions brought against the decisions of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 February 2019 (Case R 2298/2017-4) and 9 April 2019 (Case R 2297/2017-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between the Republic of Cyprus and Filotas Bellas & Yios.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders the Republic of Cyprus to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 — Yanukovych v Council

(Case T-303/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2021/C 297/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych (Rostov-on-Don, Russia) (represented by: M. Anderson, R. Kiddell, Solicitors, E. Dean and J. Marjason-Stamp, Barristers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: P. Mahnič, A. Vitro and T. Haas, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 7), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 1), in so far as those acts maintain the applicant’s name on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 238, 15.7.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Carbajo Ferrero v Parliament

(Case T-670/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Procedure of appointment to a director’s post - Notice of vacancy - Rejection of the applicant’s application and appointment of another applicant - Obligation to state reasons - Plea of illegality in respect of the measures setting the internal rules of procedure - Irregularity of the recruitment procedure - Manifest error of assessment - Inaccuracy of the information sent to the Appointing Authority - Transparency - Equal treatment - Liability - Material and non-material damage)

(2021/C 357/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Fernando Carbajo Ferrero (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: I. Terwinghe and C. González Argüelles, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 for, first, annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 10 December 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application and appointing another applicant to the post of director for media in the Directorate-General for Communication, and, secondly, for compensation for the damage the applicant allegedly suffered owing to that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Parliament of 10 December 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application and appointing another applicant to the post of director for media in the Directorate-General for Communication;

2. Orders Parliament to pay the sum of EUR 40 000 to the applicant in compensation for material damage;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Pesaro and Others v Commission

(Case T-635/19) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - State aid - Banking sector - Planned recapitalisation by a consortium of banks governed by private law for the benefit of one of its members - Measures authorised by the Central Bank of the Member State - Waiver of rescue and initiation of a resolution procedure - Directives 2014/49/EU and 2014/59/EU - Decision not to raise objections - Requests for information and positions adopted by the Commission during the preliminary examination stage - No causal link)

(2021/C 329/24)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Pesaro (Pesaro, Italy), Montani Antaldi Srl (Pesaro), Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Fano (Fano, Italy), Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Jesi (Jesi, Italy), Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio della Provincia di Macerata (Macerata, Italy) (represented by: A. Sandulli and B. Cimino, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Stancanelli, I. Barcew, A. Bouchagiar and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants inter alia on account of unlawful conduct on the part of the Commission preventing the rescue of Banca delle Marche.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Pesaro, Montani Antaldi Srl, Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Fano, Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Jesi and Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio della Provincia di Macerata to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.