ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — SGL Carbon v Commission

(Case T-639/18) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Environment - Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures - Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)

(2021/C 44/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: SGL Carbon SE (Wiesbaden, Germany) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, M. Grunchard, S. Saez Moreno and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin, R. Lindenthal and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and T. Zbihlej, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of the adoption of Commission Regulation (EU) No 944/2013 of 2 October 2013 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ 2013 L 261, p. 5), in so far as that regulation classified pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) and Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) substance.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SGL Carbon SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021 — ITD and Danske Fragtmænd v Commission

(Case T-561/18) (1)

(State aid - Postal sector - Compensation for the discharge of the universal service obligation - Decision not to raise any objections - Calculation of the compensation - Net avoided cost methodology - Taking into account the intangible benefits of the universal service - Use of funds granted as compensation - State guarantee of redundancy payments in the event of bankruptcy - VAT exemption for certain transactions carried out by the universal service provider - Accounting allocation of common costs between universal service activities and non-universal service activities - Capital contribution from a public undertaking in order to avoid the bankruptcy of its subsidiary - Complaint from a competitor - Decision finding no State aid after the preliminary examination stage - Existing aid - Advantages granted on a periodic basis - Whether imputable to the State - Private investor test)

(2021/C 242/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S (Padborg, Denmark), Danske Fragtmænd A/S (Åbyhøj, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicants: Jørgen Jensen Distribution A/S (Ikast, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch and M. Honoré, lawyers), Dansk Distribution A/S (Karlslunde, Denmark) (represented by: L. Sandberg-Mørch and J. Buendía Sierra, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: J. Nymann-Lindegren and M. Wolff, acting as Agents, and by R. Holdgaard, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 3169 final of 28 May 2018, State aid SA.47707 (2018/N) on State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2018) 3169 final of 28 May 2018, State aid SA.47707 (2018/N) on State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark, in so far as it found, at the end of the preliminary examination phase, that, first, the exemption from value added tax (VAT) introduced by Administrative Decision No 1306/90 and Administrative Regulation F 6742/90, adopted by the Danish tax authorities, and, secondly, the capital increase of DKK one billion made to Post Danmark A/S by PostNord AB on 23 February 2017, did not constitute State aid;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S to bear half of their own costs, with the rest of their costs being borne by the European Commission;

4. Orders the Commission, the Kingdom of Denmark, Jørgen Jensen Distribution A/S and Dansk Distribution A/S to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2021 — Şanli v Council

(Case T-585/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism - Freezing of funds - List of persons, groups and entities subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Action for annulment and compensation - Failure to comply with formal requirements - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 110/28)

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)

Re:

First, action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1084 of 30 July 2018 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) 2018/475 (OJ 2018 L 194, p. 144), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1071 of 30 July 2018 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) 2018/468 (OJ 2018 L 194, p. 23), in so far as they concern the applicant and, second, action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation in respect of the harm suffered as a result of the unlawfulness of those measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Dalokay Şanli to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-355/18) (1)

(Rules on languages - Notices of open competition for the recruitment of administrators in the field of public health and food safety - Restriction of the choice of language 2 to four languages - Regulation No 1 - Article 1d(1), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations - Discrimination based on language - Interests of the service - Proportionality)

(2021/C 431/28)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Centeno Huerta and L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Ruiz García, L. Vernier, D. Milanowska, I. Galindo Martín and T. Lilamand, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of notices of open competition EPSO/AD/340/18 to draw up a reserve list in the field of health and food safety (audit, inspection and evaluation) and EPSO/AD/341/18 to draw up a reserve list in the field of food safety (policy and legislation) (OJ 2018 C 97 A, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls notices of open competition EPSO/AD/340/18 to draw up a reserve list in the field of health and food safety (audit, inspection and evaluation) and EPSO/AD/341/18 to draw up a reserve list in the field of food safety (policy and legislation);

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Kingdom of Spain.

(1) OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Benavides Torres v Council

(Case T-245/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Venezuela - Freezing of funds - Lists of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Principle of sound administration - Right to effective judicial protection - Error of assessment)

(2021/C 349/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Antonio José Benavides Torres (Caracas, Venezuela) (represented by: L. Giuliano and F. Di Gianni, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Kyriakopoulou, V. Piessevaux, P. Mahnič and A. Antoniadis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/90 of 22 January 2018 amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2018 L 16 I, p. 14) and, second, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/88 of 22 January 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2063 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2018 L 16 I, p. 6), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Antonio José Benavides Torres to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 200, 11.6.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou v Commission

(Case T-757/18) (1)

(State aid - Greek casinos - System providing for a levy of 80 % on admission fees of different amounts - Differentiation between public and private casinos - Complaint - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering its recovery - Annulment of the decision by a decision of the General Court - Decision finding no State aid - Action for annulment - Challengeable act - Admissibility - Rights of the defence)

(2022/C 119/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE (Loutraki, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas and A. Pappas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and P.-J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Regency Entertainment Psychagogiki kai Touristiki AE (Maroussi, Greece), Elliniko Kazino Parnithas AE (Maroussi) (represented by: N. Niejahr, B. Hoorelbeke, I. Drillerakis and E. Rantos, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1575 of 9 August 2018 on the measures to certain Greek casinos SA.28973 — C 16/2010 (ex NN 22/2010, ex CP 318/2009) implemented by Greece (OJ 2018 L 262, p. 61).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — TUIfly v Commission

(Case T-619/18) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a procedure for the review of State aid - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party - Overriding public interest)

(2021/C 471/53)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: TUIfly GmbH (Langenhagen, Germany) (represented by: L. Giesberts and M. Gayger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck and F. Erlbacher, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 5432 final of 3 August 2018 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the administrative procedure concerning State aid SA.24221(2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Austria for the Klagenfurt airport, Ryanair and other airlines using the airport.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders TUIfly GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft v EUIPO (eVoter)

(Case T-175/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark eVoter - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 61/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft eV (Munich, Germany) (represented by: L. Genz, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2019 (Case R 1983/2018-5) relating to an application for registration of the word sign eVoter as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft eV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 November 2019 — Société des produits Nestlé v EUIPO — Jumbo Africa (Representation of a human figure on an escutcheon)

(Case T-149/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark representing the shape of a human figure on an escutcheon - EU figurative mark representing the shape of a human figure - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Power to alter decisions)

(2020/C 10/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger Lenz, A. Lambrecht and C. Elkemann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno and H. O’Neill, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Jumbo Africa, SL (L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 November 2018 (Case R 876/2018-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Jumbo Africa and Société des produits Nestlé.

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 30 November 2018 (Case R 876/2018-2);

2. Dismisses the appeal brought before EUIPO by Jumbo Africa, SL;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Société des produits Nestlé SA for the purposes of the proceedings before the General Court;

4. Orders Jumbo Africa to pay the cost necessarily incurred by Société des produits Nestlé for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;

5. Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

(1) OJ C 155, 6.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2020 — Maternus v EUIPO– adp Gauselmann (Jokers WILD Casino)

(Case T-321/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark Jokers WILD Casino - Obligation to state reasons - First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No genuine use of the trade mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 175/25)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Maternus GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Zöbisch and R. Drozdz, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Espelkamp, Germany) (represented by: K. Mandel and K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 February 2019 (Case R 803/2018-1), relating to revocation proceedings between adp Gauselmann and Maternus.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Maternus GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 238, 15.7.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 6 February 2020 — Corporació Catalana de Mitjans Audiovisuals v EUIPO — Dalmat (LaTV3D)

(Case T-135/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark LaTV3D - Earlier national word mark TV3 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the services - Similarity of the signs - Distinctive character - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 95/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Corporació Catalana de Mitjans Audiovisuals, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Erdozain López, lawyer)

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: Stéphane Dalmat (Paris, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 December 2018 (Case R 874/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Corporació Catalana de Mitjans Audiovisuals and Mr Dalmat.

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 13 December 2018 (Case R 874/2018-2) in so far as it ruled out the existence of a likelihood of confusion in relation to the services other than ‘translation and interpretation’ services in Class 41 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 148, 29.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Rot Front v EUIPO — Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (РОШЕН)

(Case T-63/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition Proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark РОШЕН - Earlier international figurative mark РОМАШКИ - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 215/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rot Front OAO (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: M. Geitz and J. Stock, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: I. Lukauskienė, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 November 2018 (Case R 1872/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Rot Front and Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’.

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 16 November 2018 (Case R 1872/2018-2);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Rot Front OAO;

3. Orders Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 122, 1.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — Plásticos Hidrosolubles (green cycles)

(Case T-78/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - European Union figurative mark green cycles - Genuine use of the mark - Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 10(3) and (4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Lack of use of the sign as a company logo)

(2020/C 201/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: A. Marx, K. Bonhagen and M. Wolter, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Plásticos Hidrosolubles, SL (Rafelbuñol, Spain) (represented by: C. Sueiras Villalobos, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 November 2018 (Case R 778/2018-5) relating to revocation proceedings between Lidl Stiftung and Plásticos Hidrosolubles.

Operative part of the order

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 29 November 2018 (Case R 778/2018-5) in so far as it found genuine use of the contested mark in respect of the goods in Class 20.

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

3. Orders Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG, EUIPO and Plásticos Hidrosolubles, SL, to each bear their own costs incurred during the proceedings before the Court.

(1) OJ C 122, 1.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2020 — Louis Vuitton Malletier v EUIPO — Wisniewski (Device of a chequerboard Pattern)

(Case T-105/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark representing a chequerboard pattern - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Well-known facts - Distinctive character acquired through use - Overall assessment of the evidence of the distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(1)(b) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 59(1) and (2) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 255/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Louis Vuitton Malletier (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, G. Lazzeretti, F. Rossi, N. Parrotta and P.-Y. Gautier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Norbert Wisniewski (Warsaw, Poland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2018 (Case R 274/2017-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Mr Wisniewski and Louis Vuitton Malletier.

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 22 November 2018 (Case R 274/2017-2);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.