ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 31/8

Judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2013 — EMA v Commission

(Case T-116/11) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Sixth framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration contributing to the creation of the European Research Area and to innovation (2002 to 2006) - Dicoems and Cocoon contracts - Non-compliance with the contractual requirements in respect of some of the declared expenses - Termination of the contracts - Repayment of part of the sums paid - Damages - Counterclaim - Non-contractual liability - Unjust enrichment - Action for annulment - Act not open to challenge - Act part of a purely contractual framework from which it is inseparable - Debit note - Inadmissible)

2014/C 31/12

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: European Medical Association (EMA) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Franchi and L. Picciano, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Delaude and F. Moro, acting as Agents and D. Gullo, lawyer)

Re:

First, main claim seeking (i) the reimbursement of costs incurred for the performance of contract No 507126 relating to the Cocoon project and contract No 507760 relating to the Dicoems project, concluded on 7 and 19 December 2003 respectively between the Commission and the applicant, (ii) a declaration that the Commission decision to terminate those contracts is unlawful, (iii) annulment of the corresponding debit note and (iv) the payment of compensation for the harm suffered and, second, in the alternative a claim based on the non-contractual liability of the Commission.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Upholds the action of the European Medical Association (EMA) in so far as it seeks the reimbursement of direct staffing costs relating to the Cocoon and Dicoems contracts of EUR 17 231,28 and indirect related costs arising from the performance of the contracts.

2. Dismisses the EMA’s action for the remainder.

3. Dismisses the Commission’s counterclaim.

4. Orders each party to bear its own costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings in Case T-116/11 R.

(1) OJ C 120, 16.4.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 359/7

Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2013 — Biotronik SE v OHIM — Cardios Sistemas (CARDIO MANAGER)

(Case T-416/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark CARDIO MANAGER - Earlier national word mark CardioMessenger - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 359/11

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Biotronik SE & Co. KG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Reich, S. Pietzcker and R. Jacobs, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Geroulakos, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Cardios Sistemas Comercial e Industrial Ltda (Sao Paulo, Brazil)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 May 2011 (Case R 1156/2010-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Biotronik SE & Co. KG and Cardios Sistemas Comercial e Industrial Ltda.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Biotronik SE & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 298, 8.10.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 135/29

Judgment of the General Court of 14 March 2014 — Holcim (Deutschland) and Holcim v Commission

(Case T-293/11) (1)

((Competition - Administrative proceeding - Decision to request information - Necessity of the information requested - Duty to state reasons - Proportionality))

2014/C 135/35

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Holcim (Deutschland) AG (Hamburg, Germany) and Holcim Ltd (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: P. Niggemann and K. Gaßler, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Kellerbauer, R. Sauer and C. Hödlmayer, acting as Agents, and A. Böhlke, lawyer)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 2363 final of 30 March 2011, in the context of a procedure pursuant to Article 18(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (Case COMP/39520 — cement and related products).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Holcim (Deutschland) AG and Holcim Ltd to pay the costs, including those of the interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 102/32

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — LG Display and LG Display Taiwan v Commission

(Case T-128/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Worldwide market for liquid crystal display (LCD) panels - Agreements and concerted practices concerning prices and production capacity - Internal sales - Rights of the defence - Fines - Partial immunity from fines - Single and continuous infringement - Ne bis in idem principle))

2014/C 102/50

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: LG Display Co. Ltd (Seoul, South Korea); and LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd, (Taipei, Taiwan) (represented by: A. Winckler and F.-C. Laprévote, lawyers),

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Van Nuffel and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents, and by S. Kingston BL)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 8761 final of 8 December 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Case COMP/39.309 — LCD — Liquid Crystal Displays), and for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets at EUR 210 000 000 the fine imposed jointly and severally on LG Display Co. Ltd and LG Display Taiwan Co. Ltd in Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2010) 8761 final of 8 December 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Case COMP/39.309 — LCD — Liquid Crystal Displays);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders LG Display and LG Display Taiwan to bear their own costs and to pay three-quarters of the costs incurred by the European Commission;

4. Orders the Commission to bear one-quarter of its own costs.

(1) OJ C 130, 30.4.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 292/29

Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2014 — Telefónica de España and Telefónica Móviles España v Commission

(Case T-151/11) (1)

((State aid - Public service broadcasting - Aid planned by Spain for RTVE - Alteration of the funding scheme - Replacement of advertising revenues by new taxes on television and telecommunication operators - Decision declaring the new funding scheme compatible with the internal market - Procedural rights - New aid - Alteration of the existing aid scheme - Fiscal measure constituting the method by which the aid measure is financed - Tax necessarily hypothecated to the aid - Direct impact of the revenue of the tax on the amount of the aid - Proportionality - Duty to state reasons))

2014/C 292/34

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Telefónica de España, SA (Madrid, Spain); and Telefónica Móviles España, SA (Madrid) (represented by: F. González Díaz and F. Salerno, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Valero Jordana and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented initially by M. Muñoz Pérez, subsequently by S. Centeno Huerta and N. Díaz Abad, subsequently by N. Díaz Abad, and lastly by M. Sampol Pucurull, abogados del Estado); and Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española, SA (RTVE) (Madrid) (represented by A. Martínez Sánchez, A. Vázquez-Guillén Fernandez de la Riva and J. Rodríguez Ordóñez, lawyers)

Re:

Application for the annulment of Commission Decision 2011/1/EU of 20 July 2010 on the State aid scheme C 38/09 (ex NN 58/09) which Spain is planning to implement for Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española (RTVE) (OJ 2011 L 1, p. 9).

Operative part of the judgment

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Telefónica de España, SA and Telefónica Móviles España, SA shall bear their own costs and pay jointly the costs incurred by the European Commission and Corporación de Radio y Televisión Española, SA (RTVE).

3. The Kingdom of Spain shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 212/24

Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2014 — European Dynamics Luxembourg v ECB

(Case T-553/11) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Provision of services relating to IT infrastructure and applications for the ECB - Rejection of the application - Action for annulment - Act open to challenge - Admissibility - Criteria for selecting candidates - Compliance of an application with the conditions laid down in the call for applications - Obligation to state reasons - Failure to exercise the power to ask for clarification in relation to an application - Manifest errors of assessment - Misuse of powers - Action for damages))

2014/C 212/28

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Ettelbrück, Luxembourg) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis and M. Dermitzakis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and P. Pfeifhofer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application (i) for annulment of the decision of the ECB to reject the application of a temporary grouping of undertakings including the applicant to participate in a negotiated tendering procedure concerning information technology services, of the decision of the Procurement Review Body of the ECB to reject the appeal against that decision, and of all related decisions of the ECB and (ii) for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders European Dynamics Luxembourg SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).

(1) OJ C 6, 7.1.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 439/26

Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2014 — Technische Universität Dresden v Commission

(Case T-29/11) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Programme of Community action in the field of public health - Contract for the funding of a project - Action for annulment - Debit note - Contractual nature of the dispute - Act not amenable to review - Inadmissibility - Reclassification of the action - Eligible costs))

(2014/C 439/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Technische Universität Dresden (Dresden, Germany) (represented by: G. Brüggen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: W. Bogensberger and D. Calciu, and subsequently by W. Bogensberger and F. Moro, acting as Agents, assisted by R. Van der Hout and A. Köhler, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of debit note No 3241011712, issued by the Commission on 4 November 2010, for the reimbursement of the sum of EUR 55 377 ,62 paid to the applicant in the context of financial assistance in support of a project conducted under the programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003-2008).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that Ms H’s staffing costs, amounting to EUR 56,76, her travel expenses, amounting to EUR 1 354,08, and the service costs amounting to EUR 351,82 incurred by Technische Universität Dresden in performing Contract No 203114 (SI2.377438) concerning the funding of the project ‘Collection of European Data on Lifestyle Health Determinants — Coordinating Party (LiS)’ conducted under the programme of Community action in the field of public health (2003-2008) are eligible and, consequently, dismisses the European Commission’s claim regarding those amounts, set out in Debit Note No 3241011712 of 4 November 2010, as unfounded;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Technische Universität Dresden to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 80, 12.3.2011
1.

Annuls, in so far as they concern Mr Mikhalchanka: — Council Decision 2011/69/CFSP of 31 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus; — Council Implementing Decision 2011/174/CFSP of 21 March 2011 implementing Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus; — Council Implementing Regulation (EC) No 271/2011 of 21 March 2011 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus; — Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus; — Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1017/2012 of 6 November 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus.
1)

Annuls Council Decision 2011/357/CFSP of 20 June 2011, amending Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against certain officials of Belarus, Council Regulation (EU) No 588/2011 of 20 June 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus, Council Decision 2011/666/CFSP of 10 October 2011 amending Decision 2010/639/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1000/2011 of 10 October 2011 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP of 15 October 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1017/2012 of 6 November 2012 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus, in so far as those acts concern Mr Vladimir Peftiev;
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2014 — Ryanair v Commission

(Case T-512/11) (1)

(State aid - Aviation sector - Irish air travel tax - Exemption for transit and transfer passengers - Decision finding no State aid - Failure to open the formal investigation procedure - Serious difficulties - Procedural rights of parties concerned)

(2015/C 016/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: E. Vahida and I.-G. Metaxas-Maragkidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, D. Grespan and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and K. Petersen, acting as Agents); and Ireland (represented by: E. Creedon, A. Joyce and E. Mc Phillips, acting as Agents, assisted by E. Regan SC)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2011) 4932 final of 13 July 2011 in so far as it finds that the non-application of the Irish air travel tax to transit and transfer passengers does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU (State aid SA.29064 (2011C ex 2011/NN)).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Annuls Commission Decision C(2011) 4932 final of 13 July 2011 in so far as it finds that the non-application of the Irish air travel tax to transit and transfer passengers does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU (State aid SA.29064 (2011C ex 2011/NN));

2) Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ryanair Ltd;

3) Orders the Federal Republic of Germany and Ireland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/9

Judgment of the General Court of 16 April 2015 — Schenker Customs Agency v Commission

(Case T-576/11) (1)

((Customs Union - Post-clearance recovery of import duties - Importation of glyphosate originating from Taiwan - Application for remission of import duties submitted by a customs agent - Article 239 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Fairness clause - Special situation - Declarations for release for free circulation - Certificates of incorrect origin - Concept of obvious negligence - Commission decision declaring remission of duties not justified))

(2015/C 190/10)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Schenker Customs Agency BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Biermasz and A. Jansen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by L. Keppenne and F. Wilman and subsequently by A. Caeiros and B.-R. Killmann, Agents, and by Y. Van Gerven, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C (2011) 5208 final of 27 July 2011, finding that the remission of import duties is not justified in a particular case (Case REM 01/2010).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Schenker Customs Agency BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 25, 28.1.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 48/35

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Singapore Airlines and Singapore Airlines Cargo v Commission

(Case T-43/11) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European airfreight market - Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) - Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 048/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Singapore Airlines Ltd (Singapore, Singapore); and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd (Singapore) (represented initially by J. Kallaugher and J. Poitras, Solicitors, J. Ruiz Calzado and É. Barbier de La Serre, lawyers, and subsequently by J. Kallaugher, J. Poitras and J. Ruiz Calzado)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by S. Noë, N. von Lingen and J. Bourke, and subsequently by S. Noë, N. von Lingen and A. Dawes, and lastly by A. Dawes, acting as Agents, and by C. Brown, Barrister)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: F. Florindo Gijón and M. Simm, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight) in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, for the annulment of or a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Singapore Airlines and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 89, 19.3.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 279/30

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2015 — European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v Commission

(Case T-536/11) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Provision of computing services for the development and maintenance of software, consultancy and assistance for different types of IT applications - Ranking of a tenderer’s bid in the cascade for different lots and ranking of the bids of other tenderers - Obligation to state reasons - Award criterion - Manifest error of assessment - Non-contractual liability))

(2015/C 279/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA (Ettelbrück, Luxembourg); European Dynamics Belgium SA (Brussels, Belgium); and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, M. Dermitzakis and N. Theologou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially by S. Delaude and V. Savov, and subsequently by S. Delaude, acting as Agents, and by O. Graber-Soudry, Solicitor)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the Publications Office of the European Union of 22 July 2011 to rank the applicants, in respect of the bids they submitted in response to the call for tenders AO 10340, concerning the provision of computing services for the development and maintenance of software, consultancy and assistance for different types of IT applications (OJ 2011/S 66-106099), in the third place in the cascade for lot 1, in the third place in the cascade for lot 4 and in the second place in the cascade for lot 3, as well as the decisions awarding the contracts at issue to other tenderers in as much as they refer to their ranking, and, second, for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 3.12.2011.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 November 2018 — Prosegur Compañía de Seguridad v Commission

(Case T-406/11) (1)

((State aid - Provisions concerning corporate tax allowing undertakings which are tax resident in Spain to amortise the goodwill resulting from the acquisition of shareholdings in undertakings which are tax resident abroad - Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Concept of State aid - Selectivity - Reference system - Derogation - Difference in treatment - Justification of the difference in treatment - Undertakings benefiting from the measure - Legitimate expectations))

(2019/C 25/46)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Prosegur Compañía de Seguridad, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: initially, J. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro and M. Muñoz de Juan, and, subsequently, J. Buendía Sierra, E. Abad Valdenebro, R. Calvo Salinero and A. Lamadrid de Pablo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, C. Urraca Caviedes and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Article 1(1) and Article 4 of Commission Decision 2011/282/EU of 12 January 2011 on the tax amortisation of financial goodwill for foreign shareholding acquisitions No C 45/07 (ex NN 51/07, ex CP 9/07) implemented by Spain (OJ 2011 L 135, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Prosegur Compañía de Seguridad, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.