ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Global Silicones Council and Others v ECHA

(Case T-519/18) (1)

(REACH - Establishment of a list of substances identified for eventual inclusion in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Entry of octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4), decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) and dodecamethylcyclohexsiloxane (D6) in that list - Articles 57 and 59 of Regulation No 1907/2006 - Annex XIII to Regulation No 1907/2006 - Weight-of-evidence determination - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality)

(2021/C 329/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Global Silicones Council (Washington, DC, United States) and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex (represented by: R. Cana and D. Abrahams, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and A. Hautamäki, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicants: American Chemistry Council, Inc. (ACC) (Washington) (represented by: K. Nordlander and C. Grobecker, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller, D. Klebs, S. Heimerl and S. Costanzo, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: L. Haasbeek and R. Lindenthal, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment in whole or in part of the decision of ECHA of 27 June 2018 including octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4), decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) and dodecamethylcyclohexsiloxane (D6) in the Candidate List for eventual inclusion in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1, corrigendum OJ 2007 L 136, p. 3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Global Silicones Council and the other parties listed in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA);

3. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany, the European Commission and American Chemistry Council, Inc. (ACC) each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2021 — Verband Deutscher Alten und Behindertenhilfe and CarePool Hannover v Commission

(Case T-69/18) (1)

(State aid - Independent social action - Subsidies granted to associations in a regional working group for charity action - Rejection of a complaint - Decision not to raise any objections at the end of the preliminary examination stage - Action for annulment - Status of interested party - Safeguarding of procedural rights - Substantial effect on competitive position - Admissibility - No serious difficulties - No substantial alteration to existing aid)

(2021/C 242/24)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Verband Deutscher Alten- und Behindertenhilfe, Landesverband Niedersachsen/Bremen und Hamburg/Schleswig-Holstein eV (Hanover, Germany), CarePool Hannover GmbH (Hanover) (represented by: T. Unger, lawyer, and S. Korte, Professor)

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

Interveners in support of the defendant: Diakonisches Werk evangelischer Kirchen in Niedersachsen eV (Hanover) (represented by: A. Bartosch, lawyer), Arbeiterwohlfahrt Bezirksverband Hannover eV (Hanover) (represented by: C. Jürschik, lawyer), Arbeiterwohlfahrt Bezirksverband Braunschweig eV (Braunschweig, Germany) and the eight other interveners whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: U. Karpenstein, R. Sangi and C. Johann, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 7686 final of 23 November 2017 on State aid schemes SA.42268 (2017/E) — Deutschland Staatliche Beihilfe zur Förderung wohlfahrtspflegerischer Aufgaben and SA.42877 (2017/E) — Deutschland CarePool Hannover GmbH implemented by Germany in favour of charitable associations for social welfare projects (OJ 2018 C 61, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Verband Deutscher Alten- und Behindertenhilfe, Landesverband Niedersachsen/Bremen und Hamburg/Schleswig-Holstein eV and CarePool Hannover GmbH to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, Diakonisches Werk evangelischer Kirchen in Niedersachsen eV, Arbeiterwohlfahrt Bezirksverband Hannover eV, Arbeiterwohlfahrt Bezirksverband Braunschweig eV and the other interveners whose names are listed in the annex.

(1) OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Rubycon and Rubycon Holdings v Commission

(Case T-344/18) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for aluminium electrolytic capacitors and tantalum electrolytic capacitors - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Price coordination throughout the EEA - Fines - Partial immunity from fines - Point 26 of the 2006 Leniency Notice - Reduction in the amount of the fine - Point 37 of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Ceiling of 10 % of turnover - Unlimited jurisdiction)

(2021/C 471/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Rubycon Corp. (Ina, Japan), Rubycon Holdings Co. Ltd (Ina) (represented by: J. Rivas Andrés and A. Federle, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Ernst, L. Wildpanner and F. van Schaik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for, first, annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 1768 final of 21 March 2018 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.40136 — Capacitors), in so far as it concerns the applicants, and, second, a reduction in the amount of the fines imposed on them.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Rubycon Corp. and Rubycon Holdings Co. Ltd to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Cabello Rondón v Council

(Case T-248/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken with regard to the situation in Venezuela - Freezing of funds - Lists of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists - Retention 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 - Freedom of expression)

(2021/C 349/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Diosdado Cabello Rondón (Caracas, Venezuela) (represented by: L. Giuliano and F. Di Gianni, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Kyriakopoulou, P. Mahnič, V. Piessevaux 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 of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1656 of 6 November 2018 amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2018 L 276, p. 10) 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), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1653 of 6 November 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2063 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2018 L 276, 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 Diosdado Cabello Rondón to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 200, 11.6.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2022 — Austria v Commission

(Case T-101/18) (1)

(State aid - Nuclear industry - Aid planned by Hungary for the development of two new nuclear reactors at the Paks site - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market subject to compliance with certain commitments - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - Compliance of the aid with EU law other than State aid law - Inextricable link - Promotion of nuclear energy - First paragraph of Article 192 of the Euratom Treaty - Principle of protection of the environment, ‘polluter pays’ principle, precautionary principle and principle of sustainability - Determination of the economic activity concerned - Market failure - Distortion of competition - Proportionality of the aid - Need for State intervention - Determination of the aid elements - Public procurement procedure - Obligation to state reasons)

(2023/C 35/50)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Austria (represented by: J. Schmoll, F. Koppensteiner, M. Klamert and T. Ziniel, acting as Agents, and by H. Kristoferitsch, lawyer)

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

Intervener in support of the applicant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: A. Germeaux and T. Schell, acting as Agents, and by P. Kinsch, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Vláčil, T. Müller, J. Pavliš and L. Halajová, acting as Agents), French Republic (represented by: E. de Moustier and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), Hungary (represented by: M. Fehér, acting as Agent, and by P. Nagy, N. Gràcia Malfeito, B. Karsai, lawyers, and C. Bellamy KC), Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent), Slovak Republic (represented by: S. Ondrášiková, acting as Agent), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: F. Shibli, L. Baxter and S. McCrory, acting as Agents, and by T. Johnston, Barrister)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the Republic of Austria seeks the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/2112 of 6 March 2017 on the measure/aid scheme/State aid SA.38454 — 2015/C (ex 2015/N) which Hungary is planning to implement for supporting the development of two new nuclear reactors at Paks II nuclear power station (OJ 2017 L 317, p. 45).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Austria to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Czech Republic, the French Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, Hungary, the Republic of Poland, the Slovak Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 152, 30.4.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 October 2021 — WM v Commission

(Case T-411/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Notice of competition - Open Competition EPSO/AD/338/17 - Decision of the Selection Board to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition - Articles 21 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 1d(1), (4) and (5) of the Staff Regulations - Reasonable accommodation - Principle of non-discrimination on the ground of disability - Directive 2000/78/EC - Liability - Material and non-material harm)

(2022/C 2/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: WM (represented by: B. Entringer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T.S. Bohr and D. Milanowska, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Selection Board of open competition EPSO/AD/338/17 of 27 September 2017 to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition as well as the decision of the Appointing Authority of 19 April 2018 rejecting his complaint and, secondly, compensation for the damages he allegedly suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 November 2019 — A9.com v EUIPO (Representation of a bell)

(Case T-240/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a bell - Absolute ground for refusal - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2019/C 432/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: A9.com, Inc. (Palo Alto, California, United States) (represented by: A. Klett, C. Mikyska and R. Walther, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 February 2019 (Case R 1309/2018-2), concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a bell as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders A9.com, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Amigüitos pets & life v EUIPO — Société des produits Nestlé (THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect)

(Case T-40/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect - Earlier EU word mark ONE - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 61/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Amigüitos pets & life, SA (Lorca, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, A. Lambrecht and C. Elkemann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2018 (Case R 272/2018-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Société des produits Nestlé SA and Amigüitos pets & life.

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 19 November 2018 (Case R 272/2018-4);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to pay, in addition to its own costs, half of the costs incurred by Amigüitos pets & life, SA, including those incurred for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal;

4. Orders Société des produits Nestlé, SA to pay, in addition to its own costs, half of the costs incurred by Amigüitos pets & life, including those incurred for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

(1) OJ C 93, 11.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2019 — MSI Svetovanje v EUIPO — Industrial Farmaceutica Cantabria (nume)

(Case T-41/19) (1)

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

(2019/C 432/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: MSI Svetovanje, marketing, d.o.o. (Vrhnika, Slovenia) (represented by: M. Maček, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Industrial Farmaceutica Cantabria, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 November 2018 (Case R 722/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Industrial Farmaceutica Cantabria and Nutrismart d.o.o.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders MSI Svetovanje, marketing, d.o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 112, 25.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Muratbey Gida v EUIPO (Shape of a twisted cheese)

(Case T-571/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a twisted cheese - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 175/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Muratbey Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: M. Schork, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 June 2019 (Case R 107/2019-4) relating to an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a twisted cheese as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Muratbey Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2020 — Pierre Balmain v EUIPO (Representation of a lion’s head encircled by rings forming a chain)

(Case T-332/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a lion’s head encircled by rings forming a chain - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 95/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Pierre Balmain (Paris, France) (represented by: J.M. Iglesias Monravá and S. Mainar Roger, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2019 (Case R 1224/2018-5), concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a lion’s head encircled by rings forming a chain as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Pierre Balmain to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Global Brand Holdings v EUIPO (XOXO)

(Case T-503/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark XOXO - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 215/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Global Brand Holdings, LLC (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: D. de Marion de Glatigny, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 April 2019 (Case R 1413/2018-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign XOXO as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Global Brand Holdings, LLC to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2020 — Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO — Döhler (TasteSense By Kerry)

(Case T-108/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark TasteSense By Kerry - Earlier EU word mark MultiSense - 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))

(2020/C 201/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Döhler GmbH (Darmstadt, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2018 (Case R 1179/2018 2), relating to opposition proceedings between Döhler and Kerry Luxembourg

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 10 June 2020 — AL v Commission

(Case T-83/19) (1)

(Civil service - Special advisers - Appointment to the post of representative of the European Union in an international partnership body - Appointment of another representative of the European Union - Legitimate expectations - Right to be heard - Principle of good administration and duty to have regard to the welfare of officials - Liability)

(2020/C 247/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: AL (represented by: S. Rodrigues and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Vernier and I. Melo Sampaio, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision implicitly rejecting the applicant’s claim for compensation of 19 December 2017 and of the decision of 12 November 2018 rejecting the applicant’s complaint and, secondly, compensation of the material and non-material damage suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders AL to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 28 May 2020 — AW v Parliament

(Case T-213/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Social security - Article 73 of the Staff Regulations - Common rules on the insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease - Article 16 - Statement of occupational disease - Article 22 - Medical Committee - Refusal to recognise the occupational nature of a disease - Irregularity of the opinion of the Medical Committee)

(2020/C 230/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: AW (represented by: L. Levi and S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the Parliament’s decisions of 7 August 2018 rejecting the requests to recognise the occupational nature of a disease, submitted by the applicant on 15 and 28 July 2016.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of the European Parliament of 7 August 2018 rejecting the requests for recognition of the occupational nature of AW’s diseases of 15 and 28 July 2016;

2. Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 187, 3.6.2019.