ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/26

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2015 — Research Engineering & Manufacturing v OHIM — Nedschroef Holding (TRILOBULAR)

(Case T-558/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark TRILOBULAR - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 007/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Research Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc. (Middletown, Rhode Island, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz, G. Hollingworth, Barristers, K. Gilbert and M. Gilbert, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Nedschroef Holding BV (Helmond, Netherlands)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 May 2014 (Case R 442/2013-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Nedschroef Holding BV and Research Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Research Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc., to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 414/31

Judgment of the General Court of 23 October 2015 — Geilenkothen Fabrik für Schutzkleidung v OHIM (Cottonfeel)

(Case T-822/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Cottonfeel - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 414/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Geilenkothen Fabrik für Schutzkleidung GmbH (Gerolstein-Müllenborn, Germany) (represented by: M. Straub, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 October 2014 (Case R 2579/2013-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Cottonfeel as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Geilenkothen Fabrik für Schutzkleidung GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

(1) OJ C 46, 9.2.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/49

Judgment of the General Court of 2 December 2015 — adp Gauselmann v OHIM (Multi Win)

(Case T-529/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Multi Win - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 027/61)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Lübbecke, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 April 2014 (Case R 1326/2013-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Multi Win as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders adp Gauselmann GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 16/29

Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2015 — Greece v Commission

(Case T-107/14) (1)

((EAGGF - Guarantee Section - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 - Single payment entitlements scheme - National reserve - Allocation criteria - Risk to the Fund - Cross compliance))

(2016/C 016/35)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented: initially by I. Chalkias, E. Leftheriotou and A. Vasilopoulou, and subsequently by M. Kanellopoulos, E. Leftheriotou and A. Vasilopoulou, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2013/763/EU of 12 December 2013 on 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 2013 L 338, p. 81), in so far as the Hellenic Republic is concerned.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Implementing Decision 2013/763/EU of 12 December 2013 on 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), in so far as it imposes a flat-rate correction on the Hellenic Republic relating to the allocation of entitlements from the national reserve and in so far as the European Commission applied to the Hellenic Republic a financial correction in respect of 2008 relating to cross-compliance;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/49

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2015 — Comercializadora Eloro v OHIM — Zumex Group (zumex)

(Case T-354/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ZUMEX - Earlier national figurative mark JUMEX - Lack of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 038/64)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Comercializadora Eloro, SA (Ecatepec, Mexico) (represented by: J. de Castro Hermida, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Zumex Group, SA (Moncada, Spain) (represented by: M.C. March Cabrelles, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 February 2014 (Case R 391/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Comercializadora Eloro, SA and Zumex Group, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Comercializadora Eloro, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/53

Judgment of the General Court of 3 December 2015 — Omega International v OHIM (Representation of a white circle and a white rectangle inside a black rectangle)

(Case T-695/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing a white circle and a white rectangle inside a black rectangle - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 027/67)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Omega International (Bad Oldesloe, Germany) (represented by: J. P. Becker, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 July 2014 (Case R 1037/2014-5) relating to an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a white circle and a white rectangle inside a black rectangle as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Omega International GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 98/34

Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2016 — Azarov v Council

(Case T-331/14) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the applicant’s name - Proof that inclusion on the list is justified))

(2016/C 098/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: G. Lansky and A. Egger, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and F. Naert, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent) and European Commission (represented by: S. Bartelt, D. Gauci and T. Scharf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment, first, of Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 66, p. 26) and of Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 66, p. 1) and, secondly, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/143 of 29 January 2015 amending Decision 2014/119 (OJ 2015 L 24, p. 16) and of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/138 of 29 January 2015 amending Regulation No 208/2014 (OJ 2015 L 24, p. 1), in so far as they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as they concern Mr Mykola Yanovych Azarov;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Azarov in relation to the claim for annulment made in the application;

4. Orders Mr Azarov to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council in relation to the claim for annulment made in the statement modifying the form of order sought;

5. Orders the Republic of Poland and the European Commission to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 98/39

Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2016 –Stavytskyi v Council

(Case T-486/14) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the applicant’s name - Proof that inclusion on the list is justified))

(2016/C 098/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Edward Stavytskyi (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J. Grayston, Solicitor, and by P. Gjørtler, G. Pandey, D. Rovetta and M. Gambardella, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and J.-P. Hix, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2014/216/CFSP of 14 April 2014 implementing Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 111, p. 91) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 381/2014 of 14 April 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 111, p. 33), in so far as the applicant’s name was included on the list of persons, entities and bodies covered by those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Decision 2014/216/CFSP of 14 April 2014 implementing Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 381/2014 of 14 April 2014 implementing Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as they concern Mr Edward Stavytskyi;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Stavytskyi.

(1) OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 118/29

Judgment of the General Court of 25 February 2016 — Puma v OHIM — Sinda Poland (Representation of an animal)

(Case T-692/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative mark representing an animal - Earlier international figurative marks representing a puma - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 118/32)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Sinda Poland Corporation sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Siciarek, J. Rasiewicz and J. Mrozowski, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 July 2014 (Case R 2214/2013-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Puma SE and Sinda Poland Corporation sp. z o.o.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 14 July 2014 (Case R 2214/2013—5);

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Puma SE, including those necessarily incurred by Puma SE for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM;

3. Orders Sinda Poland Corporation sp. z o.o. to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Puma SE, including those necessarily incurred by Puma SE for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM.

(1) OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 111/19

Judgment of the General Court of 18 February 2016 — Harrys Pubar and Harry’s New York Bar v OHIM — Harry’s New York Bar and Harrys Pubar (HARRY’S NEW YORK BAR)

(Joined Cases T-84/14 and T-97/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark HARRY’S NEW YORK BAR - Earlier national figurative mark PUB CASINO Harrys RESTAURANG - Partial refusal of registration - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 111/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Harrys Pubar AB (Gothenburg, Sweden) (represented by: L.-E. Ström, lawyer) (Case T-84/14); and Harry’s New York Bar SA (Paris, France) (represented by: S. Arnaud, lawyer) (Case T-97/14)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Harry’s New York Bar SA (Case T-84/14); and Harrys Pubar AB (intervener before the General Court in Case T-97/14)

Re:

Two actions brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 November 2013 (joined Cases R 1038/2012-1 and R 1045/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Harrys Pubar AB and Harry’s New York Bar SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls, in Case T-84/14 points 1 of the operative part of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 14 November 2013 (joined Cases R 1038/2012-1 and R 1045/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Harrys Pubar AB and Harry’s New York Bar SA;

2. Dismisses, in Case T-97/14, the action brought by Harry’s New York Bar;

3. Orders Harry’s New York Bar to bear its own costs, to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Harrys Pubar in the proceedings before the General Court and to pay the costs incurred by Harrys Pubar in the course of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM. OHIM is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay one third of the costs incurred by Harrys Pubar in the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 191/23

Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2016 — Ben Ali v Council

(Case T-200/14) (1)

((Common Foreign and Security Policy - Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia - Freezing of funds - Legal basis - Inclusion of the name of the applicant on the basis of new grounds following the annulment of the earlier freezing of funds measures - Obligation to state reasons - Right to property - Proportionality - Error of fact - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Misuse of powers - Right to life - Right to a family life - Non-contractual liability))

(2016/C 191/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mehdi Ben Tijani Ben Haj Hamda Ben Haj Hassen Ben Ali (Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, France) (represented by: A. de Saint Remy, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: G. Étienne and A. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Decision 2014/49/CFSP of 30 January 2014, amending Decision 2011/72/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2011 L 28, p. 38), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 81/2014 of 30 January 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2014 L 28, p. 2), in so far as those measures concern the applicant, and, secondly, an application for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Mehdi Ben Tijani Ben Haj Hamda Ben Haj Hassen Ben Ali to bear his own costs as well as those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 202, 30.6.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 136/32

Judgment of the General Court of 21 January 2016 — Spokey v OHIM — Leder Jaeger (SPOKeY)

(Case T-846/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark SPOKeY - Earlier Community word mark SPOOKY - Declaration of partial invalidity - Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Examination of evidence - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 136/46)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Spokey sp. z o.o. (Katowice, Poland) (represented by: B. Matusiewicz-Kulig, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Leder Jaeger GmbH (Siegen, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 October 2014 (Case R 525/2014-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Leder Jaeger GmbH and Spokey sp. z o.o.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Spokey sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/16

Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2016 — GRE v EUIPO (Mark1)

(Case T-844/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark Mark1 - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 232/21)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH (Kloster Lehnin, Germany) (represented by: I. Memmler and S. Schulz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 October 2014 (Case R 648/2014-1) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign Mark1 as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders GRE Grand River Enterprises Deutschland GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2016 — Andres and Others v ECB

(Case T-129/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - ECB staff - Pensions - Reform of the pension insurance scheme - Freezing of the pension plan - Conditions of employment of ECB staff - Right of consultation - Difference in nature between a contractual employment relationship and an employment relationship covered by the Staff Regulations - Distortion - Error of law))

(2016/C 222/16)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Carlos Andres (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) and the other 150 appellants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented initially by B. Ehlers and M. López Torres, and subsequently by B. Ehlers and F. Malfrère, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2013 in Andres and Others v ECB (F-15/10, EU:F:2013:194), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Mr Carlos Andres and the other appellants whose names are listed in the annex to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 305/27

Judgment of the General Court of 7 July 2016 — Copernicus-Trademarks v EUIPO — Maquet (LUCEO)

(Case T-82/14) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity - European Union word mark LUCEO - Absolute ground for refusal - Bad faith during the filing of the application for registration - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 305/37)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Copernicus-Trademarks Ltd (Borehamwood, United Kingdom) (represented by: F. Henkel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Schifko, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the Genelral Court: Maquet GmbH (Rastatt, Germany) (represented by: N. Hebeis, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 November 2013 (Case R 2292/2012-4) relating to invalidity proceedings between Copernicus-Trademarks and Maquet.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Copernicus-Trademarks Ltd to bear its own costs and those of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Maquet GmbH.

(1) OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.