ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/54

Judgment of the General Court of 4 December 2015 — K-Swiss v OHIM (Representation of parallel stripes on a shoe)

(Case T-3/15) (1)

((Community trade mark - International registration designating the European Community - Figurative mark representing parallel stripes on a shoe - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 027/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: K-Swiss Inc. (Westlake Village, California, United States) (represented by: R. Niebel and M. Hecht, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by P. Geroulakos and subsequently by D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 October 2014 (Case R 1093/2014-2), concerning the international registration, designating the European Community, of a figurative mark representing parallel stripes on a shoe.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders K-Swiss Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 191/29

Judgment of the General Court of 12 April 2016 — Choice v EUIPO (Choice chocolate & ice cream)

(Case T-361/15) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for the European Union figurative mark Choice chocolate & ice cream - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive Character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 191/37)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Choice sp. z o.o. (Legnica, Poland) (represented by: T. Mielke, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 April 2015 (Case R 2221/2014-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign Choice chocolate & ice cream as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 294, 07.09.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 136/34

Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2016 — Pirelli Tyre v OHIM (Tyre treads and Others)

(Joined Cases T-279/15 to T-282/15) (1)

((Community design - Community design representing tyre treads and pneumatic tyres for vehicle wheels - Failure to apply for renewal of the design and cancellation of the design upon expiry of the registration - Application for restitutio in integrum and application for renewal of the design))

(2016/C 136/48)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Pirelli Tyre SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: D. Caneva and G. Fucci, lawyers)

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

Re:

Four actions brought against the decisions of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 January 2015 (Cases R 1285/2014-3 and R 1286/2014-3) and of 11 February 2015 (Cases R 1287/2014-3 and R 1288/2014-3) relating to applications for retitutio in integrum.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders Pirelli Tyre SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 243/31

Judgment of the General Court of 24 May 2016 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Grup Supeco Maxor (Supeco)

(Case T-126/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Supeco - Earlier EU figurative mark SUPER COR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Extent of the examination carried out by the Board of Appeal - Goods and services on which the opposition is based - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 15(2)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Communication No 2/12))

(2016/C 243/33)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: E. Scheffer and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Grup Supeco Maxor, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: S. Martínez-Almeida y Alejos-Pita, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2014 (Case R 1112/2014-5) relating to opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés, SA and Grup Supeco Maxor, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders El Corte Inglés, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 11.5.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2016 — Aranynektár v EUIPO — Naturval Apícola (Natür-bal)

(Case T-503/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Natür-bal - Earlier EU word mark NATURVAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 222/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aranynektár Termékgyártó és Kereskedelmi KFT (Dunavarsány, Hungary) (represented by: I. Molnár, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Naturval Apícola, SL (Monserrat, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, D. Gabarre Armengol, G. Hinarejos Mulliez, E. Bayo de Gispert and J. Rodriguez Fuensalida, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 June 2015 (Case R 1158/2014-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Naturval Apícola and Aranynektár Termékgyártó és Kereskedelmi

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Aranynektár Termékgyártó és Kereskedelmi KFT to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 354, 26.10.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 314/21

Judgment of the General Court of 5 July 2016 — EMA v Hristov

(Case T-27/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Appointment - Procedure for selection and appointment of the executive director of a regulatory agency - EMA - Pre-selection by a pre-selection panel - Appointment by the EMA’s Management Board - Composition of the pre-selection panel - Combination of functions as a member of the pre-selection panel and as a member of the EMA’s Management Board - Impartiality))

(2016/C 314/29)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties

Appellant: European Medicines Agency (represented initially by J. Currall, N. Nikolova and S. Petrova, and subsequently by N. Nikolova and S. Petrova, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Emil Hristov (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: M. Ekimdzhiev, K. Boncheva and G. Chernicherska, lawyers) (applicant at first instance); and European Commission (represented initially by J. Currall, N. Nikolova and S. Petrova, and subsequently by N. Nikolova and S. Petrova, acting as Agents) (defendant at first instance)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 13 November 2014 in Hristov v Commission and EMA (F-2/12, EU:F:2014:245), seeking to have that judgment set aside in part.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside in part the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 13 November 2014 in Hristov v Commission and EMA (F-2/12), in so far as it annulled the decision of the Management Board of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) of 6 October 2011 appointing the Executive Director of the EMA;

2. Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the request to have set aside the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Second Chamber) of 13 November 2014 in Hristov v Commission and EMA (F-2/12) in so far as it annulled the decision of the European Commission of 20 April 2011, pursuant to which the Commission proposed to the Management Board of the EMA a list of four candidates recommended by the pre-selection panel and approved by the Consultative Committee on Appointments;

3. Refers the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal for a ruling to be given on the claim for annulment of the decision of the Management Board of the EMA of 6 October 2011 appointing the Executive Director of the EMA, in view of the heads of claim and pleas in law relied on by Mr Emil Hristov on which the Civil Service Tribunal did not adjudicate;

4. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 270/43

Judgment of the General Court of 8 June 2016 — Monster Energy v EUIPO (GREEN BEANS)

(Case T-585/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark GREEN BEANS - Application for restitutio in integrum - Non-compliance with the time limit for bringing an action before the General Court))

(2016/C 270/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2015 (Case R 3002/2014-2), concerning an application for registration of the word mark GREEN BEANS as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Monster Energy Company to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 406, 7.12.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/32

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2016 — Trajektna luka Split v Commission

(Case T-57/15) (1)

((State aid - Port services - Alleged aid to the public ferry operator of Jadrolinija - Setting of fees by the Croatian authorities for port services in the Port of Split in respect of domestic traffic at an allegedly lower level than that of the fees applied in other Croatian ports and those applied for international traffic - Private operator holding an allegedly exclusive concession for the operation of the passenger terminal at the Port of Split - Decision finding no State aid - Definition of aid - State resources))

(2016/C 392/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Trajektna luka Split d.d. (Split, Croatia) (represented by: M. Bauer, H.-J. Freund and S. Hankiewicz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and P.-J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2013) 7285 final of 15 October 2014 on State Aid SA.37265 (2014/NN) — Croatia — Alleged aid to Jadrolinija.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Trajektna luka Split d.d. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/34

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2016 — Commission v Kakol

(Case T-152/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Open competition - Non-admission of a candidate - Non-recognition of a diploma - Admission to a previous competition - Conditions of similar competitions - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 392/42)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: initially F. Simonetti, J. Currall and G. Gattinara, then F. Simonetti and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Danuta Kakol (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: R. Duta, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015, Kakol v Commission (F-1/14 and F-48/14, EU:F:2015:5), asking for annulment of that judgment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Annuls the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 January 2015, Kakol v Commission (F-1/14 and F-48/14, EU:F:2015:5),

2) Refers the case to a Chamber of the Court other than that which ruled on the present appeal;

3) Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 410/13

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2016 — Intercon v Commission

(Case T-206/15) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Grant agreement relating to the project ‘Virtual Pathological Heart of the Virtual Physiological Human’ - Commission decision to require repayment of a part of the sums paid - Inadmissibility - Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court of 2 May 1991 - Documents and observations made after expiry of the prescribed periods))

(2016/C 410/16)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Intercon Sp. z o.o. (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: B. Eger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herbout-Borczak and S. Lejeune, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 272 TFEU and seeking a declaration, first, that the Commission infringed the provisions of the grant agreement No 224635 relating to financing the project ‘Virtual Pathological Heart of the Virtual Physiological Human (VPH2)’, and, second, that the sums paid by way of the EU financial contribution corresponded to eligible expenditure and that the amount of EUR 70 620 demanded from the applicant by the Commission’s letter of 28 January 2015 and the debit note attached as an Annex need not, therefore, be repaid.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Intercon sp. z o.o. to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 221, 6.7.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/40

Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2016 –PAN Europe v Commission

(Case T-51/15) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Documents relating to endocrine-disrupting chemicals - Partial refusal of access - Exception relating to the decision-making process - Article 4(3) of Regulation No 1049/2001))

(2016/C 402/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: B. Kloostra, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Buchet, P. Mihaylova and J. Tomkin, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, C. Meyer-Seitz, U. Persson, N. Otte Widgren, E. Karlsson and L. Swedenborg, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s Decision of 24 November 2014, under the reference Ares (2014) 3900631, in so far as it refuses access to documents relating to endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 24 November 2014, under the reference Ares (2014) 3900631, in so far as it refuses access to the documents designated under numbers 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17a, 20, 22, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42 and 43, on the basis of the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) of 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;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Commission, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe);

4. Declares that the Kingdom of Sweden is to pay its own costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2016 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Hot-Can Intellectual Property (HotoGo self-heating can technology)

(Case T-407/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark HotoGo self-heating can technology - Earlier EU figurative marks representing claws - Relative grounds for refusal - No similarity of the signs - No likelihood of confusion - No connection between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 454/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and P. Ivanov, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Hot-Can Intellectual Property Sdn Bhd (Cheras, Malaysia)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 May 2015 (Case R 1028/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Monster Energy Company and Hot-Can Intellectual Property.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Monster Energy Company to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 419/40

Judgment of the General Court of 30 September 2016 — Alpex Pharma v EUIPO — Astex Pharmaceuticals (ASTEX)

(Case T-355/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ASTEX - Earlier EU word mark ALPEX - No genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 419/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Alpex Pharma SA (Mezzovico-Vira, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Bacchini, M. Mazzitelli and E. Rondinelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Plesanton, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2015 (Case R 593/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Alpex Pharma and Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Alpex Pharma, SA, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 14/31

Judgment of the General Court of 24 November 2016 — CG v EUIPO — Perry Ellis International Group (P PRO PLAYER)

(Case T-349/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark P PRO PLAYER - Earlier EU and national figurative marks P and P PROTECTIVE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 014/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH (Gevelsberg, Germany) (represented by: T. Körber, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Stoyanova-Valchanova and M. Fischer, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: O. Günzel and V. Ahmann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2015 (Case R 2439/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Perry Ellis International Group Holdings and CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd.

(1) OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 462/18

Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2016 — Jaber v Council

(Case T-154/15) (1)

((Common Foreign and Security Policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Annulment of prior measures by a judgment of the General Court - New measures including the applicant's name on the lists - Action for annulment - Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure - Content of the application - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Burden of proof - Right to property - Freedom to conduct a business))

(2016/C 462/21)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Aiman Jaber (Lattakia, Syria) (represented by: A. Boesch, D. Amaudruz and M. Ponsard, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and S. Kyriakopoulou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2015/117/CFSP of 26 January 2015 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2015, L 20, p. 85), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/108 of 26 January 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2015, L 20, p. 2), in so far as the name of the applicant is included in the list of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Mr Aiman Jaber to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union in the context of the present proceedings and during the proceedings for an interim order.

(1) OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 30/46

Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2016 — Scorpio Poland v EUIPO — Eckes-Granini Group (YO!)

(Case T-745/15) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark YO! - Prior national work mark YO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 81)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 030/52)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Scorpio Poland, formerly FH Scorpio (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: R. Rumpel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Schifko and E. Śliwińska, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Eckes-Granini Group GmbH (Nieder-Olm, Germany) (represented by: W. Berlit, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 October 2015 (Case R 1546/2014-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Eckes-Granini Group and FH Scorpio.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Scorpio Poland to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 59, 15.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/26

Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2016 — Pi-Design v EUIPO — Société des produits Nestlé (PRESSO)

(Case T-545/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration - Application for territorial extension of the protection - Word mark PRESSO - Earlier national word mark PRESSO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 022/34)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Pi-Design AG (Triengen, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Apelt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 July 2015 (Case R 428/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between the Société des produits Nestlé and Pi-Design.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Pi-Design AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 9.11.2015.