ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 144/39

Judgment of the General Court of 14 March 2017 — Wessel-Werk v EUIPO — Wolf PVG (Suction nozzles for vacuum cleaners)

(Case T-174/16) (1)

((Community design - Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity - Registered Community design representing a suction nozzle for a vacuum cleaner - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - Individual character - Informed user - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

(2017/C 144/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Wessel-Werk GmbH (Reichshof, Germany) (represented by: C. Becker, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Wolf PVG GmbH & Co. KG (Vlotho, Germany) (represented by: J. Künzel, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 February 2016 (Case R 1652/2014-3), as rectified, relating to proceedings for a declaration of invalidity between Wolf PVG and Wessel-Werk.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Wessel-Werk GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/25

Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2017 — CW v Parliament

(Case T-742/16) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Psychological harassment - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Obligation to provide assistance - Internal Rules for the Advisory Committee on Harassment and its Prevention in the Workplace - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Rejection - Decision rejecting the complaint - Independent content - Premature nature of the complaint - None - Role and powers of the Advisory Committee on Harassment and its Prevention in the Workplace - Option for an official to approach the Committee - Non-contractual liability))

(2017/C 221/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CW (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Dean, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the European Parliament’s decision of 8 April 2013 refusing to grant the request for assistance, submitted by the applicant because of the psychological harassment to which she felt she had been subjected by her superiors, and annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 23 October 2013 rejecting her complaint of 9 July 2013 and, second, damages to make good the loss the applicant is alleged to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of 23 October 2013 of the Secretary General of the European Parliament, acting as the appointing authority, rejecting CW’s complaint of 9 July 2013;

2. Rejects as inadmissible the application for annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 8 April 2013 rejecting the request for assistance made by CW;

3. Orders the Parliament to pay CW, in respect of non-material damage suffered, a sum of EUR 2 000 with default interest from the date of delivery of the present judgment at the rate fixed by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its main refinancing operations;

4. Dismisses the claim for damages as to the remainder;

5. Declares that the Parliament is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay those incurred by CW in the original proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal in the action in Case F-124/13, in the proceedings on appeal in Case T-309/15 P and in the present proceedings after referral back in Case T-742/16 RENV.

(1) OJ C 52, 22.2.2014 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-124/13).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 195/23

Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2017 — Kasztantowicz v EUIPO — Gbb Group (GEOTEK)

(Case T-97/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark GEOTEK - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Evidence of genuine use of the mark - Delay - Rule 61(2) and (3) and Rule 65(1) of Regulation No 2868/95 - Notification by fax of the time limit given to the proprietor - Absence of circumstances capable of challenging the transmission report submitted by EUIPO - Article 78 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 57 of Regulation No 2868/95 - Request for examination of witnesses - Discretion of EUIPO))

(2017/C 195/32)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Martin Kasztantowicz (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: R. Ronneburger, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Gbb Group Ltd (Letchworth, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 December 2015 (Case R 3025/2014-5) concerning revocation proceedings between Gbb Group and Mr Kasztantowicz.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Mr Martin Kasztantowicz to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 25.4.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/24

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2017 — Biogena Naturprodukte v EUIPO (ZUM wohl)

(Case T-236/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark ZUM wohl - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Reference to statement submitted to the Board of Appeal reproduced in the application - Evidence annexed to the request for a hearing))

(2017/C 256/27)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Biogena Naturprodukte GmbH & Co. KG (Salzburg, Austria) (represented by: I. Schiffer and G. Hermann, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 February 2016 (case R 1982/2015-1), relating to the application for registration of the figurative sign ZUM wohl as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Biogena Naturprodukte GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 249/25

Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2017 — Aydin v EUIPO — Kaporal Groupe (ROYAL & CAPORAL)

(Case T-95/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ROYAL & CAPORAL - Earlier EU word mark KAPORAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 249/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Savas Aydin (Pantin, France) (represented by: F. Watrin, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Kaporal Groupe (Marseilles, France) (represented by: J. André, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 December 2015 (Case R 867/2015-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Kaporal Groupe and Mr Aydin.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Mr Savas Aydin to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 156, 2.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 283/42

Judgment of the General Court of 18 July 2017 — Freddo v EUIPO — Freddo Freddo (Freggo)

(Case T-243/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for registration of the figurative EU trade mark ‘freggo’ - Earlier EU figurative trade mark ‘TENTAZIONE FREDDO FREDDO’ - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 283/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Freddo SA (Buenos Aires, Argentina) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, K. Gilbert and G. Lodge, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Freddo Freddo, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.F. Gallego Jiménez and C. Marí Aguilar, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 February 2016 (Case R 919/2015-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Freddo Freddo SL and Freddo SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Freddo SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 277/42

Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2017 – Martín Osete v EUIPO — Rey (AN IDEAL WIFE and Others)

(Joined Cases T-427/16 to T-429/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word marks AN IDEAL WIFE, AN IDEAL LOVER and AN IDEAL HUSBAND - No genuine use of the marks - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No proper reason for non-use))

(2017/C 277/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Isabel Martín Osete (Paris, France) (represented by: V. Wellens, lawyer)

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, intervener before the General Court: Danielle Rey, (Toulouse, France) (represented by: P. Wallaert and J. Cockain-Barere, lawyers)

Re:

Actions brought against the decisions of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 April 2016 (Cases R 1528/2015-2, R 1527/2015-2 and R 1526/2015-2), concerning revocation proceedings between Ms Rey and Ms Martín Osete.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders Ms Isabel Martín Osete to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 343, 19.9.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 293/31

Judgment of the General Court of 20 July 2017 — Mediaexpert v EUIPO — Mediaexpert (mediaexpert)

(Case T-780/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark mediaexpert - Earlier national word mark mediaexpert - Relative ground for refusal - Article 53(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Evidence of the existence, validity and scope of protection of the earlier mark - Registration certificate for the earlier mark - Translation - Rules 37 to 39 and Rule 98(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Legitimate expectations))

(2017/C 293/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mediaexpert sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: J. Aftyka, 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: Mediaexpert S.A. (Warsaw)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 August 2016 (Case R 2583/2015-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mediaexpert sp. z o.o. and Mediaexpert S.A.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mediaexpert sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 9.1.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 283/45

Judgment of the General Court of 19 July 2017 — Dessi v EIB

(Case T-510/16) (1)

((Civil Service - EIB staff - Appraisal - Promotion - Appraisal and promotion year 2012 - Decision of the Appeal Committee - Scope of review - Staff representatives - Discrimination))

(2017/C 283/68)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Nathalie Dessi (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented initially by: A. Senes and L. Payot, and subsequently by: L. Levi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB) (represented initially by: C. Gómez de la Cruz and E. Raimond, subsequently by: E. Raimond and G. Faedo, and finally by: G. Faedo and K. Carr, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decision of the EIB Appeal Committee of 23 October 2013, by which it rejected the applicant’s request for a review of her staff report for 2012 in that that report did not recommend to the President of the EIB that she be promoted from function group F to function group E.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the EIB Appeal Committee of 23 October 2013, by which it rejected Ms Nathalie Dessi’s request for a review of her staff report for 2012 in that that report did not recommend to the President of the EIB that she be promoted from function group F to function group E;

2. Orders the EIB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 85, 22.3.2014 (case initially registered at the European Union Civil Service Tribunal as Case F-8/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 374/33

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2017 — D'Agostino v Commission

(Case T-501/16 RENV) (1)

((Civil Service - Contractual staff - Article 3a of the CEOS - Contract not renewed - Articles 12a and 24 of the Staff Regulations - Duty of care - Interest of the service))

(2017/C 374/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Luigi D'Agostino (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: M.-A. Lucas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU, seeking, firstly, the annulment of the Commission’s decision of 1 December 2011 not to renew the applicant’s contract as a member of the contractual staff and, secondly, compensation for the loss which he allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Luigi D’Agostino to pay the costs of the present proceedings and of Case F-93/12 and to bear his own costs of Case T-670/13 P;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs of Case T-670/13 P.

(1) OJ C 343, 10.11.2012 (Case originally registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under number F-93/12).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 369/17

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2017 — Bodson and Others v EIB

(Joined Cases T-504/16 and T-505/16) (1)

((Civil service - EIB staff - Remuneration - Annual adjustment of the scale of basic salaries - Calculation method - Economic and financial crisis))

(2017/C 369/25)

Language of the cases: French

Parties

Applicants: Jean-Pierre Bodson (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) and the 485 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (Case T-504/16); and Esther Badiola (Luxembourg) and the 15 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (Case T-505/16) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB) (represented by: initially, T. Gilliams and G. Nuvoli, and subsequently G. Faedo and T. Gilliams, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, the annulment of the decisions, contained in the salary statements for February 2013 and the subsequent months, applying to the applicants the decision of the EIB Board of Directors of 18 December 2012, the decision of the EIB Management Committee of 29 January 2013, the article published online on 5 February 2013 and the information note of 15 February 2013 informing staff of the adoption of those two decisions and, secondly, an order requiring the EIB to pay to the applicants a sum corresponding to the difference between the amount of remuneration paid pursuant to those decisions and the amount of the remuneration due under the scheme resulting from the decision of the EIB Board of Directors of 22 September 2009, together with damages to compensate for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicants by reason of their loss of purchasing power and uncertainty about the changes made to their remuneration.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of the European Investment Bank (EIB) applying the decision of the EIB Board of Directors of 18 December 2012 and the decision of the EIB Management Committee of 29 January 2013 contained in the salary statements for February 2013 and the subsequent months of Mr Jean-Pierre Bodson and the other members of the EIB staff whose names are listed in the annex in Case T-504/16, on the one hand, and of Mrs Esther Badiola and the other members of the EIB staff whose names are listed in the annex in Case T-505/16, on the other hand;

2. Dismisses the actions as to the remainder;

3. Orders the EIB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under number F-41/13 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/31

Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2017 — PM v ECHA

(Case T-656/16) (1)

((REACH - Fee due for the registration of a substance - Reduction granted to SMEs - Determination of the size of the undertaking - ECHA’s verification of the undertaking’s declaration - Request for evidence demonstrating the status of a SME - Decision imposing an administrative charge))

(2017/C 402/40)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: PM (represented by: C Zambrano Almero, lawyer)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: initially E. Maurage, J.-P. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, then J.-P. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents, and by C. Garcia Molyneux, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of ECHA Decision EMS (2016) 3198 of 12 July 2016 finding that the applicant has not adduced the evidence necessary to benefit from the reduction of the fee for medium-sized enterprises and imposing an administrative charge.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Order PM to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).

(1) OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 382/41

Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2017 — Ellinikos Syndesmos Epicheiriseon gia ti Diacheirisi ton Diethnon Protypon GS1 v EUIPO — 520 Barcode Hellas (520Barcode Hellas)

(Case T-453/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark 520Barcode Hellas - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Identification of the nature of the sign cited in opposition - Other earlier sign 520 - Identification of the goods and services on which the opposition is based))

(2017/C 382/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ellinikos Syndesmos Epicheiriseon gia ti Diacheirisi ton Diethnon Protypon GS1 (Argiroupoli Attikis, Greece) (represented by: A. Mouzaki, lawyer)

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, intervener before the General Court: 520 Barcode Hellas — AE Diacheirisis Diethnon Protypon kai Parochis Symvouleutikon Ypiresion (Kifisia Attikis, Greece) (represented by: A. Roussou, M.-M. Theodoridou and F. Christodoulou-Kardiopoulis, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 June 2016 (Case R 238/2015-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ellinikos Syndesmos Epicheiriseon gia ti Diacheirisi ton Diethnon Protypon GS1 and 520 Barcode Hellas — AE Diacheirisis Diethnon Protypon kai Parochis Symvouleutikon Ypiresion.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 June 2016 (Case R 238/2015-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Ellinikos Syndesmos Epicheiriseon gia ti Diacheirisi ton Diethnon Protypon GS1; and

3. Orders 520 Barcode Hellas — AE Diacheirisis Diethnon Protypon kai Parochis Symvouleutikon Ypiresion to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 10.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 424/30

Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Hello Media Group v EUIPO — Hola (#hello digitalmente diferentes)

(Case T-330/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark #hello digitalmente diferentes - Earlier EU word and figurative marks HELLO! - 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) - Replacement of a party to the proceedings))

(2017/C 424/43)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Hello Media Group, SL (Madrid, Spain), authorised to replace Hello Media, SL (represented by: A. Alejos Cutuli, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Hola, SL (Madrid) (represented by: F. Arroyo Álvarez de Toledo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 April 2016 (Case R 1979/2015-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Hola and Hello Media.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Authorises Hello Media Group, SL, to replace Hello Media, SL, as applicant;

2. Dismisses the action;

3. Orders Hello Media Group to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 296, 16.8.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/25

Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2017 — Solelec and Others v Parliament

(Case T-281/16) (1)

((Public works contracts - Tendering procedure - Electrical work (high-voltage current) as part of the project for the extension and refurbishment of the Parliament’s Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg - Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer and decision to award the contract to another tenderer - Manifest error of assessment - Selection criteria - Technical and professional capacity - Award criteria - Abnormally low tender - Market value))

(2017/C 402/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Solelec SA (Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg), Mannelli & Associés SA (Bertrange, Luxembourg), Paul Wagner et fils SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) and Socom SA (Foetz, Luxembourg) (represented by S. Marx, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by M. Mraz and L. Chrétien, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment, first, of the Parliament decision of 27 May 2016 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicants in respect of lot No 75 in the context of the tender procedure INLO-D-UPIL-T-14-A04, entitled ‘Electricity — power’ concerning the project to extend and modernise the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg (Luxembourg), and secondly, the decision awarding that lot to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Solelec SA, Mannelli & Associés SA, Paul Wagner et fils SA and Socom SA to pay the costs, including including those incurred in the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.