ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/37

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 11 June 2009 — Confservizi v Commission

(Case T-292/02) (1)

(State aid - Scheme of aid granted by the Italian authorities to certain public utilities in the form of tax exemptions and loans at preferential rates - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market - Actions for annulment - Association of undertakings - Not individually concerned - Inadmissibility)

2009/C 180/67

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Confederazione Nazionale dei Servizi (Confservizi) (Rome, Italy) (represented by: C. Tessarolo, A. Vianello, S. Gobbato and F. Spitaleri, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Di Bucci, acting as Agent)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Associazione Nazionale fra gli Industriali degli Acquedotti — Anfida (Rome, Italy) (represented by: P. Alberti, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Articles 2 and 3 of Commission Decision 2003/193/EC of 5 June 2002 on State aid granted by Italy in the form of tax exemptions and subsidised loans to public utilities with a majority public capital holding (OJ 2003 L 77, p. 21).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible.

2. Orders the Confederazione Nazionale di Servizi (Confservizi) to bear its own costs as well as those incurred by the Commission.

3. Orders the Associazione Nazionale fra gli Industriali degli Acquedotti — Anfida to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 274, 9.11.2002.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 79/25

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 February 2008 — BUPA and Others v Commission

(Case T-289/03) (1)

(State aid - Risk equalisation scheme introduced by Ireland on the private medical insurance market - Aid system - Services of general economic interest - Article 86(2) EC - Commission decision not to raise objections - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Principles of necessity and proportionality)

(2008/C 79/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: British United Provident Association Ltd (BUPA) (London, United Kingdom); BUPA Insurance Ltd (London); and BUPA Ireland Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: N. Green QC, K. Bacon and J. Burke, Barristers, and B. Amory, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: initially N Khan and J. Flett, then N. Kahn and T. Scharf, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands represented by: N. Bel, Agent; Ireland (represented by: D. O'Hagan, Agent, with G. Hogan SC and E. Regan, Barrister); and Voluntary Health Insurance Board (Dublin) (represented by: D. Collins, G. FitzGerald and D. Clarke, Solicitors, and P. Gallagher SC)

Re:

Application by, inter alia, BUPA Ireland Ltd, a provider of private medical insurance services in Ireland, for annulment of the Commission's Decision C(2003)1322 final of 13 May 2003 not to raise objections under Article 4(2) and (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article [88 EC] (OJ 1999 L 83, p. 1), concerning the establishment of a risk equalisation scheme (RES) in the Irish health insurance market (State aid N 46/2003 — Ireland).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders British United Provident Association Ltd (BUPA), BUPA Insurance Ltd and BUPA Ireland Ltd to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Commission and the Voluntary Health Insurance Board;

3. Orders Ireland and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 264, 1.11.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 19/23

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 November 2008 — Agraz and Others v Commission

(Case T-285/03) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets in processed fruit and vegetable products - Production aid for processed tomato products - Method of calculating the amount - 2000/2001 marketing year - Determination of the loss)

(2009/C 19/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Agraz, SA (Madrid, Spain) and the 86 applicants listed in Annexes I and II to the judgment (represented by: J.L. da Cruz Vilaça, D. Choussy and S. Estima Martins)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Nolin, Agent)

Re:

Action for damages for the loss allegedly suffered by the applicants as the result of the method used to calculate the amount of production aid under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1519/2000 of 12 July 2000 setting for the 2000/2001 marketing year the minimum price and the amount of production aid for processed tomato products (OJ 2003 L 174, p. 29).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the Commission to pay to Agraz, Sa and the 86 other companies listed in Annexes I and II damages equivalent to an increase of 15.54 % in the amount of production aid which they received for the 2000/2001 marketing year, as set by Annex II to Regulation No 1519/2000.

2. Orders those damages to be reassessed using compensatory interest as from the time of actual payment of the aid to each applicant up to the date of delivery of the present judgment, at the rate fixed by the ECB for principal refinancing operations, plus two points, in respect of the applicants listed in Annex I, and at the rate of annual inflation determined for the period in question by Eurostat in the Member State where they are established, in respect of the applicants listed in Annex II.

3. Orders that the damages, as reassessed, be accompanied by default interest, as from the date of delivery of the present judgment until complete payment, at the rate set by the ECB for principal refinancing operations, plus two points.

(1) OJ C 251, 18.10.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 183/18

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 June 2008 — Ceuninck v Commission

(Case T-282/03) (1)

(Staff cases - Officials - Appointment - Post of adviser to OLAF - Rejection of candidature - Powers of the Director-General of OLAF - Validity of vacancy notice - Breach of the rules for appointing officials in Grades A4 and A5 - Misuse of powers - Manifest error of assessment)

(2008/C 183/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Paul Ceuninck (Hertsberge, Belgium) (represented by: initally G. Vandersanden and A. Finchelstein, then G. Vandersanden and L. Levi, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Joris and C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents)

Re:

First, an application for annulment of Vacancy Notice COM/051/02 and of the entire procedure pursuant to that notice and, second, an application for annulment of the decision appointing Ms S taken by the Appointing Authority on 13 September 2002 and of the implied decision rejecting the applicant's candidature.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr. Paul Ceuninck and the Commission to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 251 of 18.3.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/31

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 October 2008 — Carbone-Lorraine v Commission

(Case T-73/04) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products - Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Principle of proportionality - Principle of equal treatment)

(2008/C 301/48)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Carbone-Lorraine (Courbevoie, France) (represented by: A. Winckler and I. Simic, then A. Winckler and H. Kanellopoulos, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: F Castillo de la Torre and É. Gippini Fournier, Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Decision 2004/420/EC of 3 December 2003 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case No C.38.359 — Electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products), and, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by that decision

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Le Carbone-Lorraine to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 106, 30.4.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 171/31

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 21 May 2008 — Belfass v Council

(Case T-495/04) (1)

(Public procurement - Community tender procedure - Obvious clerical error - Award to the tender offering best value for money - Abnormally low tender - Article 139(1) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 - Plea of illegality - Specifications - Admissibility)

(2008/C 171/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Belfass SPRL (Forest, Belguim) (represented by: L. Vogel, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and A. Vitro, Agents)

Re:

Application, first, for the annulment of the decision of the Council of the European Union of 13 October 2004 to reject both the tenders submitted by the applicant under tender procedure UCA-033/04 and, secondly, for compensation in respect of the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant by reason of the Council's conduct.

Operative part of the judgment

1. Annuls the decision of the Council of the European Union of 13 October 2004 to reject the tenders of Belfass SPRL submitted under tender procedure UCA-033/04, in so far as that decision rejected Belfass' offer with respect to Lot No 2;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 57, 5.3.2005.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/42

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 June 2009 — Poland v Commission

(Case T-257/04) (1)

(Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Transitional measures to be adopted by reason of the accession of new Member States - Regulation (EC) No 1972/2003 laying down measures in respect of trade in agricultural products - Action for annulment - Period within which proceedings must be commenced - Point from which time starts to run - Delay - Amendment of a provision of a regulation - Re-opening of the action against that provision and against all provisions forming a body of rules with it - Partial admissibility - Proportionality - Principle of non-discrimination - Legitimate expectations - Statement of reasons)

2009/C 180/76

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented: initially by J. Pietras, and subsequently by E. Ośniecka-Tamecka, T. Nowakowski, M. Dowgielewicz and B. Majczyna, acting as Agents, assisted by M. Szpunar, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented: initially by A. Stobiecka-Kuik, L. Visaggio and T. van Rijn, and subsequently by T. van Rijn, H. Tserepa-Lacombe and A. Szmytkowska, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Article 3, Article 4(3) and the eighth indent of Article 4(5) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1972/2003 of 10 November 2003 on transitional measures to be adopted in respect of trade in agricultural products on account of the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (OJ 2003 L 293, p. 3), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 230/2004 of 10 February 2004 (OJ 2004 L 39, p. 13) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 735/2004 of 20 April 2004 (OJ 2004 L 114, p. 13).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Poland to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission.

(1) OJ C 251, 9.10.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/19

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 November 2008 — Shaker v OHIM — Limiñana y Botella (Limoncello della Costiera Amalfitana shaker)

(Case T-7/04) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative Community trade mark Limoncello della Costiera Amalfitana shaker - Earlier national word mark LIMONCHELO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Appeal - Case referred back to the Court of First Instance)

(2009/C 6/37)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas (Vietri sul Mare, Italy) (represented by: F. Sciaudone, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Montalto and P. Bullock, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Limiñana y Botella, SL (Monforte del Cid, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 October 2003 (Case R 933/2002-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Limiñana y Botella, SL and Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Shaker di L. Laudato & C. Sas to pay all the costs of the proceedings before the Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice.

(1) OJ C 59, 6.3.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/21

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Gul Ahmed Textile Mills v Council

(Case T-199/04 RENV) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan - Interest in bringing proceedings - Initiation of the investigation - Constructed normal value - Manifest error of assessment - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard at a hearing - Comparison between the normal value and the export price - Drawback of import duties - Adjustment - Injury - Causal link - WTO law))

(2017/C 038/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd (Karachi, Pakistan) (represented by: L. Ruessmann, lawyer, and J. Beck, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, Agent, and by R. Bierwagen and C. Hipp, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland and A. Stobiecka Kuik)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 of 2 March 2004 imposing a definitive antidumping duty on imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan (OJ 2004 L 66, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd to pay the costs of the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 217, 28.8.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 8/12

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 28 November 2007 — Vounakis v Commission

(Case T-214/05) (1)

(Staff cases - Officials - Career Development Report - 2003 Evaluation exercise - Definition of goals to achieve - Duty to state reasons - Inconsistency between points and comments - Manifest error of assessment)

(2008/C 8/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Hippocrate Vounakis (Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Berscheid and V. Joris, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision of 13 July 2004 adopting the applicant's definitive career development report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2003

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. annuls the decision of 13 July 2004 adopting the career development report in respect of Mr Hippocrate Vounakis for the period from 1 January until 31 December 2003 as far as concerns the heading ‘Productivity’;

2. dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 205, 20.8.2005.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 79/27

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 14 February 2008 — Provincia di Imperia v Commission

(Case T-351/05) (1)

(European Social Fund - Community financial aid in the area of innovative measures under Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999 - Call for proposals - Rejection of the proposal)

(2008/C 79/53)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Provincia di Imperia (Italy) (represented by: S. Rostagno and K. Platteau, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Martin and A. Weimar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the Commission's decision of 30 June 2005 not to accept the proposal presented by the applicant in response to call for proposals VP/2003/21 ‘Innovative Approaches to the Management of Change’, published in the context of innovative measures under Article 6 of the Regulation on the European Social Fund and all measures connected with that decision

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Provincia di Imperia to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the Commission.

(1) OJ C 296, 26.11.2005.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 8/13

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 27 November 2007 — GATEWAY v OHIM — Fujitsu Siemens Computers (ACTIVY Media Gateway)

(Case T-434/05) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ACTIVY Media Gateway - Earlier Community and national word and figurative marks Gateway and GATEWAY - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Absence of similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 40/94)

(2008/C 8/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Gateway, Inc. (Irvine, California, United States) (represented initially by: C.R. Jones and P. Massey, and subsequently by C.R. Jones and E.S. Mackenzie, solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Laporta Insa, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH (Munich, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 September 2005 (Case R 1068/2004-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH and Gateway, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gateway, Inc., to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs).

(1) OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 313/28

Order of the Court of First Instance of 15 October 2008 — Powerserv Personalservice v OHIM — Manpower (MANPOWER)

(Case T-405/05) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark MANPOWER - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Partial alteration - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(1)(c), Article 51(1) and (2) and Article 63(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 313/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Powerserv Personalservice GmbH, formerly Manpower Personalservice GmbH (Sankt Pölten, Austria) (represented by: B. Kuchar, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, and intervener before the Court of First Instance: Manpower, Inc. (Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States) (represented initially by: R. Moscona, Solicitor, subsequently by R. Moscona and A. Bryson, Barrister, and lastly by A. Bryson and V. Marsland, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 July 2005 (Case R 499/2004-4) relating to an application for a declaration that Community trade mark No 76059, MANPOWER, is invalid.

Operative part of the order

1. Alters the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 22 July 2005 in Case R 499/2004-4 relating to an application for a declaration that Community trade mark No 76059, MANPOWER, is invalid, to the effect that that trade mark is not descriptive, in the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland or Denmark, of the goods and services for which it was registered. The operative part of that decision is maintained.

2. Dismisses, as to the remainder, the application by Manpower Inc. seeking alteration of the above decision of the Board of Appeal of OHIM.

3. Dismisses the action.

4. Orders Powerserv Personalservice GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 22, 28.1.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 272/18

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 9 September 2008 — MyTravel v Commission

(Case T-403/05) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process - Exception relating to the protection of investigations and audits - Exception relating to the protection of legal advice - Documents relating to decisions of the Commission in the area of concentrations)

(2008/C 272/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: MyTravel Group plc (Rochdale, Lancashire, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Pannick, QC, A. Lewis, Barrister, M. Nicholson, S. Cardell and B. McKenna, Solicitors)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Hellström and P. Costa de Oliveira, and subsequently by X. Lewis and P. Costa de Oliveira, Agents)

Re:

ACTION for the annulment of the Commission's decisions of 5 September 2005 (D(2005) 8461) and 12 October 2005 (D(2005) 9763), refusing to grant the applicant access to certain preparatory documents for the Commission Decision 2000/276/EC of 22 September 1999 declaring a concentration to be incompatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No IV/M. 1524 Airtours/First Choice), and to documents drafted by the Commission services in consequence of the annulment of that decision by judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 June 2002 in Case T-342/99 [2002] ECR II-2585.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Commission of 5 September 2005 (D(2005) 8461) in so far as it refuses access to a working document entitled ‘Minutes from the conversation of a member of the case team in Case M.1524 Airtours/First Choice on the Airtours case conducted on 24 June 2002’;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders MyTravel Group plc to bear nine-tenths of its own costs and nine-tenths of the costs incurred by the Commission;

4. Orders the Commission to bear one-tenth of its own costs and one-tenth of the costs incurred by MyTravel Group.

(1) OJ C 10, 14.1.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/43

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 June 2009 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-369/05) (1)

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Aids for restructuring and conversion in the wine sector - Aids for the improvement of the production and marketing of honey - Concept of loss of revenue due to implementation of the plan - Article 13(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 - Concept of intervention intended to stabilise the agricultural markets - Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999)

2009/C 180/78

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: F. Díez Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for the partial annulment of Commission Decision 2005/555/EC of 15 July 2005 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2005 L 188, p. 36), in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by Spain in the wine and honey sectors.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 296, 26.11.2005.