ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 174/23

Order of the General Court of 24 April 2012 — Alstom v Commission

(Case T-517/09) (1)

(Competition - Market for power transformers - Letter from the Commission’s accounting officer - Refusal to accept the provision of a bank guarantee as a means of provisional cover of the fine - Disappearance of interest in bringing proceedings - No need to adjudicate)

2012/C 174/37

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alstom (Levallois-Perret, France) (represented by: J. Derenne and A. Müller-Rappard, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet, N. von Lingen and K. Mojzesowicz, agents)

Re:

First, action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 7601 final of 7 October 2009, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/39.129 — Power Transformers), imposing a fine on the applicant and, second, action for annulment of the letter from the Commission’s accounting officer of 10 December 2009 refusing to allow the provision of a bank guarantee as a means of provisional recovery of that fine.

Operative part of the order

1. It is not necessary to give a ruling on the action for annulment of the letter from the Commission’s accounting officer of 10 December 2009 refusing to allow the provision of a bank guarantee as a means of provisional cover of the fine imposed by Commission Decision C(2009) 7601 final of 7 October 2009, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/39.129 — Power Transformers).

2. The costs are reserved.

(1) OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 253/28

Order of the General Court of 2 April 2014 — Unicid v Commission

(Case T-305/09) (1)

((State aid - Framework system of actions able to be undertaken by the recognised French agricultural interprofessional organisations in favour of members of the agricultural sectors represented - Financing by voluntary levies made compulsory - Decision declaring the aid scheme compatible with the common market - Withdrawal of the decision - No need to adjudicate))

2014/C 253/40

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Union nationale interprofessionnelle cidricole (Unicid) (Paris, France) (represented by: V. Ledoux and B. Néouze, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: B. Stromsky and C. Urraca Caviedes, subsequently by: B. Stromsky and S. Thomas, and finally by: B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 7846 final of 10 December 2008 concerning State aid No 561/2008, on the framework system of actions able to be undertaken by the recognised French agricultural interprofessional organisations in favour of members of the agricultural sectors represented

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

2. The European Commission shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 244, 10.10.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 225/82

Order of the General Court of 10 June 2013 — Trasys v Commission

(Case T-277/09) (1)

2013/C 225/185

Language of the case: English

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 244, 10.10.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 179/40

Order of the President of the General Court of 30 April 2010 — Xeda International v European Commission

(Case T-71/10 R)

(Application for interim measures - Directive 91/414/EEC - Decision concerning the non-inclusion of diphenylamine in Annex I to Directive 91/414 - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Lack of urgency)

2010/C 179/70

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Xeda International SA (Saint-Andiol, France) (represented by: C. Mereu, K. Van Maldegem, lawyers, and P. Sellar, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Bianchi and L. Parpala, acting as Agents, assisted by J. Stuyck, lawyer)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of operation of Commission Decision 2009/859/EC of 30 November 2009 concerning the non-inclusion of diphenylamine in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that substance (OJ 2009 L 314, p. 79) pending judgment in the main proceedings.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 328/30

Order of the President of the General Court of 15 October 2010 — Nexans France v Joint Undertaking Fusion for Energy

(Case T-415/10 R)

(Application for interim measures - Tendering procedure - Rejection of a tender - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency)

2010/C 328/51

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Nexans France SAS (Clichy, France) (represented by: J.-P. Tran Thiet and J.-F. Le Corre, lawyers)

Defendant: European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy (represented by: A. Verpoint, Agent and C. Kennedy-Loest, C. Thomas, M. Farley, Solicitors, J. Derenne and N. Pourbaix, lawyers)

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of decisions taken by the defendant, in a tendering procedure, to reject the applicant’s bid and to award the contract for supply of TF and PF conductors to another tenderer.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 246/36

Order of the General Court of 14 July 2010 — Grupo Osborne v OHIM — Confecciones Sanfertús (TORO)

(Case T-165/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of opposition - No need to adjudicate)

2010/C 246/61

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Grupo Osborne, SA (El Puerto de Santa María, Spain) (represented by: J. M. Iglesias Monravá, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Confecciones Sanfertús, SL (Graus, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 January 2010 (Case R 638/2009-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Confecciones Sanfertús, SL and Grupo Osborne, SA.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The applicant shall bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 148, 5.6.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 113/13

Order of the General Court of 16 February 2011 — Lux Management Holding SA v OHIM — Zeis Excelsa (KULTE)

(Case T-130/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for a declaration of invalidity - Agreement for co-existence of the marks and withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate)

2011/C 113/26

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lux Management Holding SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: S. Mas, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Zeis Excelsa SpA (Montegranaro, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 January 2010 (Case R 712/2008-4) concerning proceedings between Zeis Excelsa SpA and Lux Management Holding SA for a declaration of invalidity

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Lux Management Holding SA shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 134, 22.5.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 46/13

Order of the General Court of 2 December 2010 — Apostolov v Commission

(Case T-73/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Staff cases - Recruitment - Competition - Rejection of application - Delay - Different overall impression - Appeal in part clearly inadmissible and in part clearly unfounded)

2011/C 46/26

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Svetoslav Apostolov (Saarwellingen, Germany) (represented by: D. Schneider-Addae-Mensah, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 15 December 2009 in Case F-8/09 Apostolov v Commission ECR-SC I A-1-0000 and II-A-1-0000, seeking, inter alia, to have that order set aside

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Mr Svetoslav Apostolov shall bear his own costs and shall pay those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 145/27

Order of the General Court of 21 March 2011 — Milux v OHIM (REFLUXCONTROL and Others)

(Joined Cases T-139/10, T-280/10 to T-285/10 and T-349/10 to T-352/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Representation of the applicant by a lawyer who is not a third party - Inadmissibility)

2011/C 145/46

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Milux Holding SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: J. Bojs, lawyer)

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

Re:

Actions against the decisions of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 January 2010 (Case R 1134/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign REFLUXCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-139/10); of 29 April 2010 (Case R 1432/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign ANEURYSMCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-280/10); of 29 April 2010 (Case R 1433/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign APPETITECONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-281/10); of 8 June 2010 (Case R 1434/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign STOMACONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-282/10); of 17 June 2010 (Case R 1435/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign BMICONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-283/10); of 3 June 2010 (Case R 1438/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign IMPLANTCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-284/10); of 29 April 2010 (Case R 1444/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign CHEMOCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-285/10); of 29 June 2010 (Case R 1436/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign OVUMCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-349/10); of 2 July 2010 (Case R 1437/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign HEARTCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-350/10); of 28 July 2010 (Case R 1439/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign VESICACONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-351/10); and of 28 July 2010 (Case R 1443/2009-4), concerning the application for registration of the word sign RECTALCONTROL as a Community trade mark (Case T-352/10)

Operative part of the order

1. Cases T-139/10, T-280/10 to T-285/10 and T-349/10 to T-352/10 are joined for the purposes of the present order.

2. The actions are dismissed as inadmissible.

3. Milux Holding SA is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 148, 5.6.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 238/36

Order of the General Court of 20 June 2011 — Gas Natural Fenosa SDG v Commission

(Case T-484/10) (1)

2011/C 238/62

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 204/23

Order of the General Court of 23 May 2011 — Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej v Commission

(Case T-226/10) (1)

(Action for annulment - Representation by lawyers who are not third parties - Inadmissibility)

2011/C 204/43

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: H. Gruszecka and D. Pawłowska, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and K. Mojzesowicz, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 1234 of 3 March 2010, adopted pursuant to Article 7(4) of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2008 L 108, p. 33), ordering the Polish regulatory authority in the field of electronic communications services and postal services to withdraw two notified draft measures concerning the national wholesale market for IP traffic exchange (IP transit) (Case PL/2009/1019) and the wholesale market for IP peering with the network of Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. (TP) (Case PL/2009/1020).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible;

2. Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 209, 31.7.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 319/22

Order of the General Court of 6 September 2011 — ClientEarth v Council

(Case T-452/10) (1)

(Action for annulment - Representation by a lawyer who is not a third party - Manifest inadmissibility)

2011/C 319/47

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Hockman QC, and P. Kirch, lawyer)

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

Intervening parties on behalf of the applicant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by C. Vang and S. Juul Jørgensen Agents); Republic of Finland (represented by H. Leppo and M. Pere, Agents); and Kingdom of Sweden (represented by K. Petkovska, A. Falk, S. Johannesson and C. Meyer-Seitz, Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of the Council decision of 26 July 2010 refusing to grant the applicant full access to an opinion of the Council’s Legal Service (Document No 6865/09) on the European Parliament’s draft amendments to the Commission’s proposal for a regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.

2. ClientEarth shall bear its own costs and also pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

3. The Kingdom of Denmark, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden shall bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/48

Order of the General Court of 14 July 2011 — Apotheke DocMorris v OHIM (Representation of a green cross)

(Case T-173/10) (1)

2011/C 282/89

Language of the case: German

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 179, 3.7.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/16

Order of the General Court of 9 November 2011 — ClientEarth and Others v Commission

(Case T-120/10) (1)

(Access to documents of the institutions - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Implied refusal of access - Interest in bringing proceedings - Express decision adopted after the action was brought - Refusal to amend the form of order sought - No need to adjudicate)

2012/C 6/30

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: ClientEarth (London, United Kingdom); European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E) (Brussels, Belgium); European Environmental Bureau (EEB) (Brussels); BirdLife International (Brussels) (represented by: S. Hockman QC, and by P. Kirch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and C. ten Dam, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision of 9 February 2010 refusing access to certain documents relating to biofuels modelling

Operative part of the order

1. There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by ClientEarth, the European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E), the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and BirdLife International.

(1) OJ C 134, 22.5.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 340/22

Order of the General Court of 21 September 2011 — Etimine and Etiproducts v ECHA

(Case T-343/10) (1)

(Action for annulment - REACH - Identification of boric acid and disodium tetraborate, anhydrous as substances of very high concern - No direct concern - Inadmissibility)

2011/C 340/47

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Etimine SA (Bettembourg, Luxembourg); and AB Etiproducts Oy (Espoo, Finland) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: M. Heikkilä and W. Broere, Agents and by J. Stuyck and A.-M. Vandromme, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Oliver and E. Manhaeve, Agents, and by K. Sawyer, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the ECHA, published on 18 June 2010, identifying boric acid (EC No 233-139-2) and disodium tetraborate, anhydrous (EC No 215-540-4) as substances meeting the criteria referred to in Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1), and including those substances in the candidate list for eventual inclusion in Annex XIV to Regulation No 1907/2006, in accordance with Article 59 of that regulation.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Etimine SA and AB Etiproducts Oy shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).

3. The European Commission shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 288, 23.10.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 138/17

Order of the General Court of 6 March 2012 — Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development v Commission

(Case T-453/10) (1)

(Action for annulment - EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure incurred by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - Expenditure excluded from European Union financing - Devolved administration - No direct concern - Inadmissibility)

2012/C 138/33

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (Belfast, United Kingdom) (represented by: K. Brown, Solicitor, and D. Wyatt QC)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Van den Wyngaert, P. Rossi and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment in part of Commission Decision 2010/399/EU of 15 July 2010 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 2010 L 184, p. 6)

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. The Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 184/19

Order of the General Court of 20 April 2012 — Entegris v OHIM — Optimize Technologies (OPTIMIZE TECHNOLOGIES)

(Case T-163/10) (1)

2012/C 184/37

Language of the case: English

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 71/20

Order of the General Court of 14 January 2013 — Divandari v Council

(Case T-497/10) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Withdrawal from the list of persons concerned - No need to adjudicate)

2013/C 71/32

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ali Divandari (Teheran, Iran) (represented: initially by S. Gadhia, S. Ashley, Solicitors, D. Wyatt QC and R. Blakeley, Barrister, and subsequently by R. Blakeley, S. Zaiwalla, F. Zaiwalla, Solicitors, and M. Brindle QC)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by S. Boelaert and M. Konstantinidis, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 39), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2010 of 26 July 2010 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 25), Council Decision 2010/644/CFSP of 25 October 2010 amending Decision 2010/413 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 81), Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1), Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413 (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 71), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation No 961/2010 (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 11), and Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1) in so far as those measures concern the applicant

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on this action.

2. The Council of the European Union shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Mr Ali Divandari.

3. The European Commission shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 355/26

Order of the General Court of 21 September 2012 — TI Media Broadcasting and TI Media v Commission

(Case T-501/10) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Italian pay-TV market - Decision modifying the commitments attached to a decision declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the EEA agreement - Call for tenders for the award of digital terrestrial television frequencies in Italy - Action devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate - Inadmissibility)

2012/C 355/56

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: Telecom Italia Media Broadcasting Srl (TI Media Broadcasting) (Rome, Italy) and Telecom Italia Media SpA (TI Media) (Rome) (represented by: B. Caravita di Toritto, L. Sabelli, F. Pace and A. d’Urbano, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially B. Gencarelli and P. Manzini, and subsequently L. Malferrari and J. Bourke, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Sky Italia Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: F. González Díaz and F. Salerno, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 4976 final of 20 July 2010 modifying the commitments attached to a decision declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the EEA agreement (Case COMP/M.2876).

Operative part of the order

1. There is no further need to adjudicate on the first and fourth heads of claim.

2. The remainder of the application is dismissed.

3. Each party shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 346, 18.12.2010.