ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Cases T-402/17 and T-403/17: Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2018 — Vienna International Hotelmanagement v EUIPO (Vienna House and VIENNA HOUSE) (EU trade mark — Applications for EU word mark Vienna House and figurative mark VIENNA HOUSE — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Not distinctive — Article 7(1(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1(b) and (c) of Regulation 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2018 — Vienna International Hotelmanagement v EUIPO (Vienna House and VIENNA HOUSE)

(Cases T-402/17 and T-403/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Applications for EU word mark Vienna House and figurative mark VIENNA HOUSE — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Not distinctive — Article 7(1(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1(b) and (c) of Regulation 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Vienna International Hotelmanagement AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: E. Zrzavy, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 April 2017 (Cases R 333/2016-4 and R 332/2016-4) concerning applications for registration of, on the one hand, the word sign Vienna House and, on the other, the figurative sign VIENNA HOUSE as EU trade marks.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the joinder of Cases T-402/17 and T-403/17 for the purposes of the present judgment;

2. Dismisses the actions;

3. Orders Vienna International Hotelmanagement AG to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Case T-413/17: Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2018 — Karl Storz v EUIPO (3D) (EU trade mark — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark 3D — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Absence of any distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2018 — Karl Storz v EUIPO (3D)

(Case T-413/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark 3D — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Absence of any distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Karl Storz GmbH & Co. KG (Tuttlingen, Germany) (represented by: S. Gruber and N. Siebertz, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 April 2017 (Case R 1502/2016 2), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark 3D.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 11 April 2017 (Case R 1502/2016-2) in respect of ‘stationery’ goods which fall within Class 16 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;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 September 2018 — RS v Commission

(Case T-73/17) (1)

((Civil service - Temporary agents - Recruitment - Internal competition - Constitution of a reserve list for the recruitment of assistants - Eligibility condition relating to the requirement of 12 months’ continuous employment before the expiry of the deadline for submitting an application - Leave on personal grounds - Non-admission to the tests in a competition))

(2018/C 392/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: RS (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Bersheid and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, the annulment of the decision of the jury of internal competition COM/02/AST/16 (AST 2) rejecting the application of the applicant and, second, compensation for the damage he allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the jury of internal competition COM/02/AST/16 (AST 2) rejecting the application of RS;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 112, 10.4.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Lotte v EUIPO — Nestlé Unternehmungen Deutschland (Representation of a koala bear)

(Case T-41/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark representing koalas - Earlier national three-dimensional mark KOALA-BÄREN Schöller lustige Gebäckfiguren - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Power to alter decisions))

(2018/C 328/62)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Lotte Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: M. Knitter, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Nestlé Unternehmungen Deutschland GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, S. Cobet-Nüse and C. Elkemann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 October 2016 (Case R 0250/2016-5), concerning opposition proceedings between Nestlé Schöller GmbH & Co. KG and Lotte.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 October 2016 (Case R 0250/2016-5) in so far as, in that decision, the Board of Appeal upheld the opposition for ‘pastries filled with chocolate cream; chocolate; confectionery products; pastry; cookies; crackers; edible ices; pastry and confectionery’ in Class 30;

2. Rejects the opposition brought by Nestlé Schöller GmbH & Co. KG, legal predecessor of Nestlé Unternehmungen Deutschland GmbH, for ‘pastries filled with chocolate cream; chocolate; confectionery products; pastry; cookies; crackers; edible ices; pastry and confectionery’ in Class 30;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Lotte Co Ltd for the purposes of the proceedings before the General Court;

4. Orders Nestlé Unternehmungen Deutschland to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 95, 27.3.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 25 September 2018 — Amicus Therapeutics UK and Amicus Therapeutics v EMA

(Case T-33/17) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents held by the EMA and submitted as part of the request for authorisation to place the medicinal product Galafold on the market - Decision to grant a third party access to a document - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - No general presumption of confidentiality))

(2018/C 408/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Amicus Therapeutics UK Ltd (Gerrards Cross, United Kingdom) and Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. (Cranbury, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: L. Tsang, J. Mulryne, Solicitors, and F. Campbell, Barrister)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by N. Rampal Olmedo, S. Marino, A. Spina, A. Rusanov and T. Jabłoński, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of EMA Decision ASK-22072 of 14 December 2016, granting to a third party, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), access to a document containing information submitted in the context of a request for marketing authorisation for the medicinal product Galafold.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Amicus Therapeutics UK Ltd and Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 104, 3.4.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 September 2018 — Cyprus v EUIPO — M. J. Dairies (BBQLOUMI)

(Case T-384/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark BBQLOUMI - Prior United Kingdom word certification mark HALLOUMI - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Rejection of the opposition - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 408/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, D. Walicka and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: M. J. Dairies EOOD (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 April 2017 (Case R 496/2016-4), concerning opposition proceedings between the Republic of Cyprus and M. J. Dairies.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Cyprus to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 14.8.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2018 — Spiegel–Verlag Rudolf Augstein and Sauga v ECB

(Case T-116/17) (1)

(Access to documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - Documents concerning the public debt and the budget deficit of an EU Member State - Refusal of access - Exceptions relating to the economic policy of the European Union and of a Member State)

(2018/C 427/65)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Spiegel–Verlag Rudolf Augstein GmbH & Co. KG (Hamburg, Germany) and Michael Sauga (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Koreng and T. Feldmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and T. Filipova, acting as Agents, assisted by D. Sarmiento Ramírez-Escudero and L.E. Capiel, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Executive Board of the ECB, notified to the applicants by letter of 15 December 2016, rejecting their application for access to two documents concerning the public deficit and the public debt of the Hellenic Republic.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Spiegel–Verlag Rudolf Augstein GmbH & Co. KG and Mr Michael Sauga to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).

(1) OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2018 — Sevenfriday v EUIPO — Seven (SEVENFRIDAY)

(Case T-449/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SEVENFRIDAY - Earlier EU word mark SEVEN - International registration designating the European Union - Earlier figurative mark 7SEVEN - 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))

(2018/C 427/74)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sevenfriday AG (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Mostardini, F. Mellucci, S. Pallavicini and G. Bellomo, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Seven SpA (Leinì, Italy) (represented by: L. Trevisan, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 May 2017 (Case R 2292/2016-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Seven and Sevenfriday.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sevenfriday AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 300, 11.9.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2018 — John Mills v EUIPO — Jerome Alexander Consulting (MINERAL MAGIC)

(Case T-7/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MINERAL MAGIC - Earlier national word mark MAGIC MINERALS BY JEROME ALEXANDER - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 436/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: John Mills Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Jerome Alexander Consulting Corp. (Surfside, Florida, United States) (represented by: T. Bamford and C. Rani, Solicitors)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2016 (Case R 2087/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Jerome Alexander Consulting and John Mills.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Chamber of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 5 October 2016 (Case R 2087/2015-1);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay, in addition to its own costs, half of the costs incurred by John Mills Ltd;

3. Orders Jerome Alexander Consulting Corp. to pay, in addition to its own costs, half of the costs incurred by John Mills.

(1) OJ C 63, 27.2.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2018 — VF International v EUIPO — Virmani (ANOKHI)

(Case T-548/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative trade mark ANOKHI - Earlier EU figurative mark kipling - Earlier EU figurative mark representing the silhouette of a monkey - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 EU) - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 436/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: VF International Sagl (Stabio, Switzerland) (represented by: T. van Innis, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Ken Virmani (Munich, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 May 2017 (Case R 2307/2015-4) relating to opposition proceedings between VF International and Mr Virmani.

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 26 May 2017 (Case R 2307/2015-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by VF International Sagl.

(1) OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2018 — ‘Pro NGO!’ v Commission

(Case T-454/17) (1)

((Public procurement - Tendering procedure - Investigation by an external auditor - OLAF investigation - Finding of irregularities - Commission decision imposing an administrative penalty on the applicant - Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures financed by the general budget of the European Union for a period of six months - Registration in the Early Detection and Exclusion System database - New plea in law - Right of defence))

(2019/C 16/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant:‘Pro NGO!’ (Non-Governmental-Organisations/Nicht-Regierungs-Organisationen) e.V. (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: M. Scheid, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Dintilhac and B.-R. Killmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 16 May 2017 imposing the administrative penalty of exclusion of the applicant for a period of six months from procurement and grant award procedures financed by the general budget of the European Union and laid down in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (OJ 2012 L 298, p. 1) and the exclusion of the applicant for the same period from the grant of funds laid down in Council Regulation (EU) 2015/323 of 2 March 2015 on the financial regulation applicable to the 11th European Development Fund (OJ 2015 L 58, p. 17).

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ‘Pro NGO!’ (Non-Governmental-Organisations/Nicht-Regierungs-Organisationen) e.V. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 330, 2.10.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2018 — Aldo Supermarkets v EUIPO — Aldi Einkauf (ALDI)

(Case T-359/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition procedure - Application for EU word mark ALDI - Earlier national figurative mark ALDO - Relative ground for refusal - Conditions governing admissibility of the opposition - Rule 15 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 2 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Conditions governing representation of the earlier mark - Rule 19 of Regulation No 2868/95 (now Article 7 of Delegated Regulation 2018/625) - Lack of proof of genuine use of earlier mark - Article 42 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 4/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aldo Supermarkets (Varna, Bulgaria) (represented initially by: C. Saettel, and subsequently by: T. Chevrier and M. Thewes, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaite-Orlovskiene, A. Folliard-Monguiral and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2017 (Case R 976/2016-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Aldo Supermarkets and Aldi Einkauf.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Aldo Supermarkets to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2018 — Septona v EUIPO — Intersnack Group (welly)

(Case T-763/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark welly - Earlier EU figurative marks Kelly’s and Kelly’s www.kellys.eu CHIPS - 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)))

(2019/C 44/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Septona AVEE (Oinofyta, Greece) (represented by: V. Wellens, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Intersnack Group GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 July 2017 (Case R 1525/2016-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Intersnack Group and Septona.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 July 2017 (Case R 1525/2016-1);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 22, 22.1.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 November 2018 — Le Pen v Parliament

(Case T-161/17) (1)

((Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Parliamentary assistance allowance - Recovery of sums unduly paid - Power of the Secretary-General - Rights of the defence - Legitimate expectations - Obligation to state reasons - Equal treatment - Misuse of power - Error of fact - Proportionality))

(2019/C 44/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Marion Le Pen (Saint-Cloud, France) (represented by: initially M. Ceccaldi and J.-P. Le Moigne, then M. Ceccaldi, and lastly R. Bosselut, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: G. Corstens and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the European Parliament of 6 January 2017 concerning the recovery from the applicant of a sum of EUR 41 554 unduly paid for parliamentary assistance, and of the debit note of 11 January 2017 relating thereto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Ms Marion Le Pen to bear her own costs and pay those incurred by the European Parliament.

(1) OJ C 151, 15.5.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2018 — Der Grüne Punkt v EUIPO — Halston Properties (Representation of a circle with two arrows)

(Case T-253/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU collective figurative mark representing a circle with two arrows - Genuine use of the mark - Revocation in part - Declaration of revocation in part - Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Rule 22(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 10(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Presentation of the mark on the packaging - Perception of the relevant public))

(2019/C 72/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Der Grüne Punkt — Duales System Deutschland GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: P. Goldenbaum, I. Rohr and N. Ebbecke, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Halston Properties, s. r. o. (Bratislava, Slovakia)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 February 2017 (Case R 1357/2015-5), concerning revocation proceedings between Halston Properties and Der Grüne Punkt — Duales System Deutschland.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Der Grüne Punkt — Duales System Deutschland GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 195, 19.6.2017.