ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2021 — FT and Others v Commission

(Case T-224/20) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Remuneration - Commission staff posted to a third country - Interim update of correction coefficients - Manifest error of assessment - Retroactive effect - Legal certainty - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials)

(2022/C 84/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: FT and 22 other applicants whose names are listed in annex to the judgment (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the applicants’ salary statements for the month of June 2019 in so far as they apply, for the first time, the correction coefficients fixed, with retroactive effect, on 1 August 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders FT and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
1.

Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 2 July 2020 which, first, rejected the joint tender submitted by Sopra Steria Benelux and Unisys Belgium in the context of the tendering procedure bearing reference TAXUD/2019/OP/0006 for services for the specification, development, maintenance and support of the third level of the IT platforms of the Directorate General for ‘Taxation and Customs Union’ and, secondly, awarded the contract to the other consortium that submitted a tender in so far as it concerns lot A;
Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2022 — LU v EIB

(Case T-536/20) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Dignity at Work Policy - Psychological harassment - Investigation procedure - Action for annulment - Final report of the investigation panel - Preparatory act - Inadmissibility - Decision rejecting the complaint - Act adversely affecting an official - Admissibility - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Rights of the defence - Right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Liability)

(2022/C 128/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LU (represented by: B. Maréchal, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU and to Article 50a(1) of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, in essence, annulment of the final report issued by the Dignity at Work Panel on 13 May 2020 and of the decision of the President of the EIB of 26 May 2020 rejecting the harassment complaint lodged by the applicant and, second, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the President of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 26 May 2020 rejecting the harassment complaint made by LU;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the EIB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 23.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 –EFFAS v EUIPO — CFA Institute (CEFA Certified European Financial Analyst)

(Case T-369/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark CEFA Certified European Financial Analyst - Earlier EU word mark CFA - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 95/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Federation of Financial Analysts’ Societies (EFFAS) (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: S. Merico, G. Macías Bonilla and F. Miazzetto, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: P. Villani, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: CFA Institute (Charlottesville, Virginia, United States) (represented by: G. Engels and W. May, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 March 2020 (Case R 1082/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between CFA Institute and EFFAS.

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 31 March 2020 (R 1082/2019-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by European Federation of Financial Analysts’ Societies (EFFAS);

3. Orders CFA Institute to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2022 — Sabra v Council

(Case T-249/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Syria - Freezing of funds - Errors of assessment - Criterion of a leading businessperson operating in Syria - Presumption of a link with the Syrian regime - Rebuttal of the presumption)

(2022/C 198/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Abdelkader Sabra (Beirut, Lebanon) (represented by: M. Lester QC, and A. Bradshaw, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: T. Haas and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2020/212 of 17 February 2020 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 43 I, p. 6), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/211 of 17 February 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 43 I, p. 1), Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/719 of 28 May 2020 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 66), and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/716 of 28 May 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 1), in so far as those measures concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2020/212 of 17 February 2020 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/211 of 17 February 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/719 of 28 May 2020 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/716 of 28 May 2020 implementing Regulation No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, in so far as those measures concern Mr Abdelkader Sabra;

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

(1) OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2022 — BSEF v Commission

(Case T-113/20) (1)

(Energy - Directive 2009/125/EC - Ecodesign requirements for electronic displays - Regulation (EU) 2019/2021 - Ban on halogenated flame retardants in the enclosure and stand of electronic displays - Competence of the author of the act - Manifest error of assessment - Legal certainty - Proportionality - Equal treatment)

(2022/C 198/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bromine Science Environnemental Forum (BSEF) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: R. Cana, E. Mullier and H. Widemann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. De Meester and L. Haasbeek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2021 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for electronic displays pursuant to Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, amending Commission Regulation (EC) No 1275/2008 and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 642/2009 (OJ 2019 L 315, p. 241), in so far as it bans the use of halogenated flame retardants in the enclosure and stand of electronic displays.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bromine Science Environnemental Forum (BSEF) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2022 — Eurobolt and Others v Commission

(Case T-479/20) (1)

(Dumping - Extension of the anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in China to imports consigned from Malaysia - Compliance with a judgment of the Court of Justice - Article 266 TFEU - Re-imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty - Non-retroactivity - Effective judicial protection - Principle of good administration - Competence of the author of the act)

(2022/C 284/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Eurobolt BV (’s-Heerenberg, Netherlands), Fabory Nederland BV (Tilburg, Netherlands), ASF Fischer BV (Lelystad, Netherlands), Stafa Group BV (Maarheeze, Netherlands) (represented by: S. De Knop, B. Natens and A. Willems, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and G. Luengo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/611 of 30 April 2020 re-imposing the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 91/2009 on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China to imports of certain iron or steel fasteners consigned from Malaysia, whether declared as originating in Malaysia or not (OJ 2020 L 141, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Eurobolt BV, Fabory Nederland BV, ASF Fischer BV and Stafa Group BV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 304, 14.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2022 — Mandelay v EUIPO — Qx World (QUEST 9)

(Case T-516/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark QUEST 9 - Earlier EU word mark QUEX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Articles 95 and 97 of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 244/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. (Mandelay Kft.) (Szigetszentmiklós, Hungary) (represented by: V. Luszcz, C. Sár and É. Ulviczki, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Qx World Kft. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Á. László and B. Mező, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 June 2020 (Case R 1900/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between QX WORLD and Mandelay.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by QX WORLD Kft.

(1) OJ C 339, 12.10.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — LA International Cooperation v Commission

(Case T-609/20) (1)

(Pre-Accession Assistance Instrument - OLAF investigation - Commission decision imposing an administrative sanction - Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general budget of the European Union for a period of four years - Registration in the early detection and exclusion system database - Financial regulation - Unlimited jurisdiction - Proportionality of the sanction)

(2022/C 318/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LA International Cooperation Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: B. O’Connor and M. Hommé, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Pethke, acting as Agent)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, LA International Cooperation Srl, formerly Lattanzio e Associati SpA, seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 July 2020 excluding it, for a period of four years, from participating in procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general budget of the European Union and participation in procedures for the award of funds governed by 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), and ordered the publication of that exclusion on the Commission’s website.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LA International Cooperation Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 June 2022 — Tubes Radiatori v EUIPO — Antrax It (Radiator)

(Case T-380/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Community design representing a radiator - Earlier designs - Grounds for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Freedom of the designer - No scope for innovation - Overall impression)

(2022/C 294/33)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Tubes Radiatori Srl (Resana, Italy) (represented by: S. Verea, K. Muraro, M. Balestriero and P. Menapace, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Antrax It Srl (Resana) (represented by: L. Gazzola and G. Lugato, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2020 (Case R 1275/2017-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Antrax It and Tubes Radiatori.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tubes Radiatori Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 271, 17.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — PB v Commission

(Case T-775/20) (1)

(Public supply contracts - Provision of technical assistance services to the High Judicial Council and the Ukrainian authorities - Irregularities in the procedure for awarding contracts - Recovery of amounts unduly paid - Debit note - Director of the company - Legal basis - Non-contractual liability)

(2022/C 432/24)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: PB (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz, J. Estrada de Solà and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by E. Rebasti and I. Demoulin, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action, the applicant seeks, first, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 7151 final of 22 October 2020 concerning the application of an administrative measure against the director of the company [Confidential], withdrawing the amounts unduly received under the contract with reference number TACIS/2006/101-510 and the contract with reference number CARDS/2008/166-429, and, second, under the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU, repayment of any amounts recovered by the European Commission on the basis of that decision together with the payment of EUR 10 000 in damages, subject to completion of the proceedings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2020) 7151 final of 22 October 2020 concerning the application of an administrative measure against the director of the company [Confidential], withdrawing the amounts unduly received under the TACIS/2006/101-510 and CARDS/2008/166-429 contracts;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders PB, the European Commission and the Council of the European Union to each bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 72, 1.3.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — JC v EUCAP Somalia

(Case T-165/20) (1)

(Arbitration clause - International contract staff of EUCAP Somalia - Common Foreign and Security Policy mission - Termination of a fixed-term contract during the trial period - Notification of termination of the contract by registered letter with a form for acknowledgment of receipt - Sent to an incomplete address - Starting point of the period for an internal appeal prior to court proceedings - Determination of the applicable law - Mandatory provisions of national employment law - Invalidity of the trial clause - Irregular notification of notice - Compensation in lieu of notice - Retroactive payment of remuneration - Counterclaim)

(2022/C 359/73)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: JC (represented by: A. Van Himst, lawyer)

Defendant: EUCAP Somalia (represented by: E. Raoult, lawyer)

Re:

By his action under Article 272 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, a declaration that the letters of 4 November 2019 and of 3 December 2019 by which EUCAP Somalia notified him of its decision to terminate his employment contract are invalid and, in so far as necessary, a declaration that the decision of 24 January 2020 by which EUCAP Somalia rejected his non-disciplinary internal appeal against the decision to terminate his employment contract as notified by the letter of 3 December 2019 is invalid and, second, that EUCAP Somalia be ordered to pay him his salary retroactively until the definitive, proper and lawful end date of the contractual relationship.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that the notice of termination contained in the letter of 4 November 2019 is invalid;

2. Declares that the termination of the contract of 21 August 2019 concluded between EUCAP Somalia and JC is lawful, valid and enforceable against JC on the date of 5 December 2019 and takes definitive effect at the end of the one month notice period from 9 December 2019 in accordance with Article 18.1 of that contract;

3. Orders EUCAP Somalia to pay JC, first, a sum corresponding to his remuneration, as set out in Article 12.2 of the employment contract, excluding the daily allowances provided for by Article 15 of that contract, for the period 26 November to 8 December 2019 inclusive and, second, a sum corresponding to compensation in lieu of notice equal to one month of that remuneration, for the period 9 December 2019 to 9 January 2020, plus interest at the statutory rate under Belgian law;

4. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

5. Rejects EUCAP Somalia’s counterclaim;

6. Orders EUCAP Somalia to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2022 — Lithuania v Commission

(Case T-537/20) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure by Lithuania - Aid for early retirement - Article 52(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 - Article 34(6) and Article 35(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 908/2014)

(2023/C 35/56)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Lithuania (represented by: R. Dzikovič and K. Dieninis, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina, J. Jokubauskaitė and M. Kaduczak, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the Republic of Lithuania seeks the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/859 of 16 June 2020 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2020 L 195, p. 59), in so far as that decision imposed on it a flat-rate financial correction of 5 %, thereby excluding the sum of EUR 2 186 447,97 from financing under the early retirement aid measure during the period from 16 October 2013 to 30 June 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 359, 26.10.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2022 — KD v EUIPO

(Case T-298/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - 2019 Appraisal exercise - Appraisal report - Pre-litigation procedure - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Duty of care - Liability - Non-material damage)

(2023/C 7/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: KD (represented by S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by K. Tóth, acting as Agent, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU and brought on 22 May 2020, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of her appraisal report for the 2019 appraisal exercise and, secondly, compensation in respect of the non-material damage she claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls KD’s appraisal report in respect of the 2019 appraisal exercise;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay three quarters of the costs incurred by KD;

4. Orders KD to pay a quarter of her own costs.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Bustos v EUIPO — Bicicletas Monty (motwi)

(Case T-159/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark motwi - Earlier national word mark MONTY - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 95/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Dante Ricardo Bustos (Wenling, China) (represented by: A. Lorente Berges, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bicicletas Monty, SA (Sant Feliú de Llobregat, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 January 2021 (Case R 289/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Bicicletas Monty and Mr Bustos.

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 21 January 2021 (Case R 289/2020-5);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2021 — Ciano Trading & Services CT & S and Others v Commission

(Case T-45/21) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Sustainable restoration for the Commission in Brussels and its surroundings - Annulment of the tendering procedure - Legitimate expectations - Abuse of rights)

(2021/C 490/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Ciano Trading & Services CT & S SpA (Fiumicino, Italy), Silvia Brizio (Venaria Reale, Italy), Laurence André (Grivegnée, Belgium), Lidia Pacitti (Neder-over-Heembeek, Belgium) (represented by: D. Gillet and S. Van Besien, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Van Noyen and M. Ilkova, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission decision of 20 November 2020 annulling tendering procedure OIB/2019/CPN/0039 concerning sustainable restoration for the Commission in the Brussels-Capital Region and its surroundings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ciano Trading & Services CT & S SpA, Silvia Brizio, Laurence André and Lidia Pacitti to pay the costs relating to the main proceedings and to the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.