ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/6

Judgment of the General Court of 6 February 2014 — AC-Treuhand v Commission

(Case T-27/10) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European markets in tin heat stabilisers and ESBO/esters heat stabilisers - Decision finding two infringements of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Consultancy firm not operating in the markets at issue - Fines - Application for annulment - Meaning of ‘undertaking’ - Principle of the legality of offences and penalties - Duration of the infringement - Limitation - Duration of the administrative procedure - Reasonable period - Rights of the defence - Late notification of the investigation - Maximum of 10 % of turnover - Punishment of two infringements in one decision - Concept of a single infringement - Application for variation - Amount of the fines - Duration of the infringements - Duration of the administrative procedure - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Value of sales - Symbolic fine - Unlimited jurisdiction)

2014/C 78/12

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: AC-Treuhand AG (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Steinle and I. Bodenstein, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Ronkes Agerbeek and R. Sauer, Agents, and by A. Böhlke, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 8682 final of 11 November 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.589 — Heat Stabilisers), or, in the alternative, for a reduction of the fines imposed.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders AC-Treuhand AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.
2.

Annuls Article 1(16) of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (case COMP/38344 — Prestressing Steel), amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, and by Commission Decision C(2011) 2269 final of 4 April 2011, in so far as it finds that Siderurgica Latina Martin SpA (SLM) participated in a series of agreements and commercial practices in the prestressing steel sector in the internal market and within the European Economic Area (EEA) from 10 February 1997 to 14 April 1997;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 34/26

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2014 — Ferriera Valsabbia and Valsabbia Investimenti v Commission

(Case T-92/10) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for concrete reinforcing bars in bars or coils - Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Fixing of prices and payment terms - Limiting or controlling output or sales - Misuse of powers - Rights of the defence - Single and continuous infringement - Fines - Fixing of the starting amount - Extenuating circumstances - Duration of the administrative procedure))

(2015/C 034/29)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: Ferriera Valsabbia SpA (Odolo, Italy); and Valsabbia Investimenti SpA (Odolo) (represented by: D. Fosselard, S. Amoruso and L. Vitolo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by R. Sauer and B. Gencarelli, and subsequently by R. Sauer and R. Striani, acting as Agents, assisted by P. Manzini, lawyer)

Re:

Primarily, application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, readoption), as amended by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009, in so far as it finds that the applicants infringed Article 65 CS and imposes upon them, jointly and severally, a fine of EUR 10,25 million, or in the alternative application for a reduction in the amount of that fine

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ferriera Valsabbia SpA and Valsabbia Investimenti SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 113, 1.5.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 182/20

Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2018 — H v Council

(Case T-271/10 RENV) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - National staff member seconded to EUPM in Bosnia and Herzegovina - Redeployment decision - Power of the Head of the EUPM to decide on the redeployment of a seconded national staff member - Obligation to state reasons - Misuse of powers - Manifest error of assessment - Psychological harassment))

(2018/C 182/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: H (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Vitro and F. Naert, acting as Agents)

Re:

In the first place, application based on Article 263 TFEU for annulment of (i) the decision of 7 April 2010, signed by the Chief of Personnel of the European Union Police Mission (EUPM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, by which the applicant was redeployed to the post of Criminal Justice Advisor — Prosecutor at the regional office in Banja Luka (Bosnia and Herzegovina) and (ii) of the decision of 30 April 2010, signed by the Head of EUPM referred to in Article 6 of Council Decision 2009/906/CFSP of 8 December 2009 on the EUPM in Bosnia and Herzegovina (OJ 2009 L 322, p. 22), confirming the decision of 7 April 2010, and in the second place, action on the basis of Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders H to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 221, 14.8.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 302/38

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — Trafilerie Meridionali v Commission

(Case T-422/10) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European prestressing steel market - Price fixing, market sharing and exchanging of sensitive commercial information - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single, complex and continuous infringement - Proportionality - Principle that penalties must fit the offence - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2015/C 302/48)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Trafilerie Meridionali SpA, formerly Emme Holding SpA (Pescara, Italy) (represented by: G. Visconti, E. Vassallo di Castiglione, M. Siragusa, M. Beretta and P. Ferrari, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by B. Gencarelli and V. Bottka, then by V. Bottka and R. Striani and lastly by V. Bottka and G. Conte, Agents, and P. Manzini, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment and alteration of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (case COMP/38344 — Prestressing Steel), amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, and by Commission Decision C(2011) 2269 final of 4 April 2011.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Article 1(17) of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (case COMP/38344 — Prestressing Steel), amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, and by Commission Decision C(2011) 2269 final of 4 April 2011, in so far as the Commission found that Trafilerie Meridionali SpA, formerly Emme Holding SpA, had participated in the pan-European aspect of the infringement at issue from 4 March 1997 to 9 October 2000, considered that that participation related to 3-wire strand from 4 March 1997 to 28 February 2000, and found that that participation in the anti-competitive practices was for the period from 30 August 2001 to 10 June 2002;

2. Annuls Article 2(17) of Decision C(2010) 4387 final, as amended by Decision C(2010) 6676 final and by Decision C(2011) 2269 final;

3. Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Trame at EUR 3,2 million;

4. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

5. Orders each party to bear its own costs as regards Case T-422/10;

6. Orders Trafilerie Meridionali to bear its own costs and those of the European Commission as regards Case T-422/10 R.

(1) OJ C 317, 20.11.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 80/18

Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2012 — Run2Day Franchise v OHIM — Runners Point (Run2)

(Case T-64/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark Run2 - Earlier Community word and figurative marks RUN2DAY - Earlier BENELUX figurative mark RUN2DATE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 80/30

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Run2Day Franchise BV (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: H. Koenraad, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Pohlmann, agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Runners Point Warenhandels GmbH (Recklinghausen, Germany) (represented by: H. Prange, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 November 2010 (Case R 349/2010-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Run2Day Franchise BV and Runners Point Warenhandels GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 11 November 2010 (Case R 349/2010-1);

2. Orders OHIM and Runners Point Warenhandels GmbH to pay, apart from their own costs, those incurred by Run2Day Franchise BV.

(1) OJ C 89, 19.3.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 258/19

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2012 — Rivella International v OHIM — Baskaya di Baskaya Alim (BASKAYA)

(Case T-170/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark BASKAYA - Earlier international figurative mark Passaia - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Relevant territory - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 258/33

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Rivella International AG (Rothrist, Switzerland) (represented initially by: C. Spintig, U. Sander and H. Förster, and subsequently by C. Spintig, S. Pietzcker and R. Jacobs, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas (Grosseto, Italy) (represented by: H. Vogler, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 January 2011 (Case R 534/2010-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Rivella International AG and Baskaya di Baskaya Alim e C. Sas

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Rivella International AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 200/15

Judgment of the General Court of 24 May 2012 — TMS Trademark-Schutzrechtsverwertungsgesellschaft v OHIM — Comercial Jacinto Parera (MAD)

(Case T-152/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community figurative mark MAD - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009)

2012/C 200/31

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: TMS Trademark-Schutzrechtsverwertungsgesellschaft mbH (Dusseldorf, Germany) (represented by: B. Hein and M.-H. Hoffmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Comercial Jacinto Parera, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 December 2010 (Case R 449/2009-2) concerning cancellation proceedings between TMS Trademark-Schutzrechtsverwertungsgesellschaft mbH and Comercial Jacinto Parera, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders TMS Trademark-Schutzrechtsverwertungsgesellschaft mbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 7.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 399/20

Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2012 — Hartmann v OHIM (Nutriskin Protection Complex)

(Case T-415/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark Nutriskin Protection Complex - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 - OHIM’s decision-making practice - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)

2012/C 399/35

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Paul Hartmann AG (Heidenheim an der Brenz, Germany) (represented by: N. Aicher, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: K. Klüpfel and A. Poch, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 May 2011 (Case R 1524/2010-1), concerning an application for registration of the sign Nutriskin Protection Complex as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Paul Hartmann AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 298, 8.10.2011.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2012 — Video Research USA, v OHIM (VR)

(Case T-267/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Community figurative mark VR - Failure to apply for renewal of the mark - Cancellation of the mark upon expiry of the registration - Application for restitutio in integrum - Article 81 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

(2012/C 331/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Video Research USA, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: B. Brandreth, Barrister)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM, of 8 March 2011 (Case R 1187/2010-2), relating to an application for restitutio in integrum.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Video Research USA, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 16.7.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 55/10

Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2013 — Lidl Stiftung v OHIM — Lactimilk (BELLRAM)

(Case T-237/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark BELLRAM - Earlier national word and figurative marks RAM and Ram - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Right to be heard - Articles 63(2), 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Opposition period)

2013/C 55/16

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: T. Träger, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: K. Klüpfel and D. Walicka, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Lactimilk, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: P. Casamitjana Lleonart, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 March 2011 (Case R 1154/2009-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Lactimilk, SA and Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 204, 9.7.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 26/42

Judgment of the General Court of 5 December 2012 — Consorzio vino Chianti Classico v OHIM — FFR (F.F.R.)

(Case T-143/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a Community figurative mark ‘F.F.R.’ - Earlier national figurative marks CHIANTI CLASSICO - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 26/80

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Consorzio vino Chianti Classico (Radda in Chianti, Italy) (represented by: S. Corona, G. Ciccone and A. Loffredo, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by V. Melgar and G. Mannucci and subsequently by V. Melgar and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Fédération française de rugby (FFR) (Marcoussis, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 January 2011 (Case R 43/2010-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Consorzio vino Chianti Classico and Fédération française de rugby (FFR).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 10 January 2011 (Case R 43/2010-4) in so far as the Board of Appeal rejected the opposition based on Article 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Consorzio vino Chianti Classico and OHIM each to bear the costs which they have incurred in the course of the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 152, 21.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 108/23

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2013 — Nitrogénművek Vegyipari v Commission

(Case T-387/11) (1)

(State aid - Banking sector - Loans guaranteed by Hungary and granted by a development bank - Decision declaring the aid measures partly incompatible and ordering their recovery - Private investor test)

2013/C 108/61

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Nitrogénművek Vegyipari Zrt. (Pétfürdő, Hungary) (represented by: Z. Tamás and M. Le Berre, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche, P. Němečková and C. Urraca Caviedes, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/269/EU of 27 October 2010 on State aid C-14/09 (ex NN 17/09) granted by Hungary to Péti Nitrogénművek Zrt. (OJ 2011 L 118, p. 9).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nitrogénművek Vegyipari Zrt. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 71/17

Judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2013 — Fon Wireless v OHIM — nfon (nfon)

(Case T-283/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark nfon - Earlier Community trade mark fon and earlier national word mark FON - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Application for alteration)

2013/C 71/26

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Fon Wireless Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented initially by F. Brandolini Kujman, and then by L. Montoya Terán, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: nfon AG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Schweyer, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Fon Wireless Ltd and nfon AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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 18 March 2011 (Case R 1017/2009-4) to the effect that the action brought by nfon AG before the Board of Appeal is dismissed;

2. orders OHIM to bear its own costs and those incurred by Fon Wireless Ltd;

3. orders nfon to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 32, 4.2.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 114/34

Judgment of the General Court of 7 March 2013 — Poland v Commission

(Case T-370/11) (1)

(Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 - Benchmarks to be applied to calculate the allocation of emission allowances - Equal treatment - Proportionality)

2013/C 114/54

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: M. Szpunar, B. Majczyna, C. Herma and M. Nowacki, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, K. Herrmann and K. Mifsud-Bonnici, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for the annulment of Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2011 L 130, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 290, 1.10.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/18

Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2013 — Ruse Industry v Commission

(Case T-489/11) (1)

(State aid - Aid granted by Bulgaria in the form of a debt waiver - Decision declaring that aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - New aid - Distortion of competition - Obligation to state reasons)

2013/C 129/35

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties

Applicant: Ruse Industry (Ruse, Bulgaria) (represented by: A. Angelov and S. Panov, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Urraca Caviedes and D. Stefanov, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision 2012/706/EU of 13 July 2011 on the State aid SA.28903 (C 12/10) (ex N 389/09) implemented by Bulgaria in favour of Ruse Industry (OJ 2012 L 320, p. 27).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ruse Industry AD to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the application for interim relief.

(1) OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 189/19

Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2013 — Greece v Commission

(Case T-294/11) (1)

(EAGGF - ‘Guarantee section’ - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Olive oil - Arable crops - Manifest error of assessment - Increase in the correction due to recurrence of the infringement - Effect of the reform of the CAP on the correction - Proportionality - Nature of the expenditure intended for the establishment of the Olive GIS)

2013/C 189/37

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: I. Chalkias and S. Papaïoannou, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and A. Markoulli, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s Implementing Decision 2011/244/EU of 15 April 2011 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2011 L 102, p. 33) so far as concerns the Hellenic Republic

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.