ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Japan Airlines v Commission

(Case T-340/17) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for airfreight - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport - Coordination of elements of the price of airfreight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) - Exchange of information - Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission - Article 266 TFEU - Limitation period - Rights of the defence - Non-discrimination - Single and continuous infringement - Amount of the fine - Value of sales - Gravity of the infringement - Additional amount - Mitigating circumstances - Encouragement of the anticompetitive conduct by public authorities - Substantially limited involvement - Proportionality - Unlimited jurisdiction)

(2022/C 207/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Japan Airlines Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis and K. Van Hove, lawyers, and R. Burton, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, G. Koleva and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting as Agents, and by J. Holmes QC)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) in so far as it relates to the applicant and, in the alternative, for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Article 1(1)(h) and (4)(h) of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight);

2. Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Japan Airlines Co. Ltd in Article 3(h) of that decision at EUR 28 875 000;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders Japan Airlines to bear one third of its own costs;

5. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Japan Airlines.

(1) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij v Commission

(Case T-325/17) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for airfreight - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) - Exchange of information - Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission - Single and continuous infringement - Equal treatment - Obligation to state reasons - Amount of the fine - Value of sales - Gravity of the infringement - Extenuating circumstances - Anticompetitive conduct encouraged by the national authorities - Proportionality - Unlimited jurisdiction)

(2022/C 207/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (Amstelveen, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Smeets, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) in so far as it relates to the applicant and, in the alternative, for the partial annulment of the decision and a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear one third of its own costs;

3. Orders Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV to bear its own costs and pay two thirds of those incurred by the Commission.

(1) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Judgment of the General Court 13 December 2018 — CN v Parliament

(Case T-76/18) (1)

((Civil service - Accredited parliamentary assistants - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Psychological harassment - Advisory Committee dealing with harassment complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the European Parliament and its prevention at the workplace - Decision rejecting the request for assistance - Right to be heard - Principle of audi alteram partem - Refusal to disclose the opinion of the Advisory Committee and the minutes of the hearing of witnesses - Refusal of the defendant institution to comply with a measure of inquiry of the General Court))

(2019/C 82/64)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: CN (represented by: C. Bernard-Glanz and A. Tymen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: D. Boytha and E. Taneva, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 20 March 2017 by which the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment of that institution rejected the request for assistance made by the applicant on 13 February 2013 and, second, compensation for the loss he has allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Parliament of 20 March 2017, by which the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment of that institution rejected the request for assistance made by CN on 13 February 2013;

2. Orders the Parliament to pay CN, in respect of non-material harm suffered, an amount of EUR 8 500;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 March 2019 — Serenity Pharmaceuticals v EUIPO — Gebro Holding (NOCUVANT)

(Case T-321/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark NOCUVANT - Earlier word marks NOCUTIL - Proof of genuine use - Article 47(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2019/C 139/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Serenity Pharmaceuticals LLC (Milford, Pennsylvania, United States) (represented by: J. Day, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Gebro Holding GmbH (Fieberbrunn, Austria) (represented by: M. Konzett, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2018 (Case R 584/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Gebro Holding and Allergan, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Serenity Pharmaceuticals LLC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 240, 9.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 February 2019 — Nemius Group v EUIPO (DENTALDISK)

(Case T-278/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark DENTALDISK - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 122/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Nemius Group GmbH (Obertshausen, Germany) (represented by: C. Bildhäuser, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Sesma Merino and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 January 2018 (Case R 741/2017-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign DENTALDISK as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nemius Group GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 221, 25.6.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 May 2019 — Fissler v EUIPO (vita)

(Case T-423/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark vita - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptiveness - Concept of characteristic - Name of a colour - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 213/34)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Fissler GmbH (Idar-Oberstein, Germany) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt and K. Middelhoff, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 March 2018 (Case R 1326/2017-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign vita as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 March 2018 (Case R 1326/2017-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 4 April 2019 — Rodriguez Prieto v Commission

(Affaire T-61/18) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - ‘Eurostat’ case - National criminal proceedings - No need to adjudicate - Request for assistance - Whistle-blower - Presumption of innocence - Action for damages and annulment)

(2019/C 182/35)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Amador Rodriguez Prieto (Steinsel, Luxembourg) (represented by: S. Orlandi, T. Martin and R. Garcia-Valdecasas y Fernandez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and R. Striani, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, primarily, compensation for the material and non-material damage which the appl cant alleges to have suffered and, in the alternative, annulment of the decision of the Commission of 28 March 2017 rejecting the applicant’s request for assistance.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the claims for damages;

2) Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 28 March 2017 rejecting Mr Amador Rodriguez Prieto’s request for assistance;

3) Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Rodriguez Prieto.

(1) OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2019 — Stirlinx Arkadiusz Kamusiński v EUIPO — Heinrich Bauer Verlag (Brave Paper)

(Case T-37/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Brave Paper - Earlier national word mark BRAVO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Conceptual similarity)

(2019/C 230/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stirlinx Arkadiusz Kamusiński (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Pruszczyk, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Heinrich Bauer Verlag KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: U. Grübler, S. Engels and C. Engelmann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 November 2017 (Case R 391/2017-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Heinrich Bauer Verlag and Stirlinx Arkadiusz Kamusiński.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Stirlinx Arkadiusz Kamusiński to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2019 — Lucchini v Commission

(Case T-185/18) (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 - Partial annulment of the Commission decision - Rejection of a request for reimbursement of a fine paid pursuant to a decision annulled in part - Rejection of a request to be allowed to participate in the administrative procedure that was reopened following the partial annulment of the decision - Rights of the defence - Non-existent act - Non-contractual liability - Limitation)

(2019/C 230/48)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Lucchini SpA in AS (Piombino, Italy) (represented by: G. Belotti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi, G. Conte and T. Vecchi, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s letter of 17 January 2018 rejecting the applicant’s request to be reimbursed for the fine, in the amount of EUR 14 350 000, that was imposed on it by Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 concerning an infringement of Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty, in accordance with Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, re-adoption) and of the Commission’s letter of 9 March 2018 rejecting the applicant’s request to be allowed to participate in the resumed procedure relating to that case and, secondly, application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union committed by the Commission in the procedure leading to the adoption of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Lucchini SpA in AS to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 June 2019 — Biedermann Technologies v EUIPO (Compliant Constructs)

(Case T-291/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Compliant Constructs - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 263/50)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Biedermann Technologies GmbH & Co. KG (Donaueschingen, Germany) (represented by: A. Jacob, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 March 2018 (Case R 1626/2017-4) relating to an application for registration of the word sign Compliant Constructs as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Biedermann Technologies GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2019 — Porsche v EUIPO — Autec (Cars)

(Case T-210/18) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a car - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2019/C 255/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: C. Klawitter, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Autec AG (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Krogmann, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 January 2018 (Case R 941/2016-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Autec AG and Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 166, 14.5.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2019 — Szegedi v Parliament

(Case T-135/18) (1)

(Law governing the institutions - Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Travel expenses - Parliamentary assistance expenses - Recovery of sums unduly paid - Rights of defence - Disclosure of evidence - Obligation to state reasons - Error of fact - Proportionality)

(2019/C 295/33)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Csanád Szegedi (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: K. Bodó, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Görlitz, S. Seyr and B. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 30 November 2017 relating to the recovery from the applicant of the sum of EUR 264 196,11 unduly paid in respect of travel expenses and parliamentary assistance expenses and the related debit note of 19 December 2017.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 30 November 2017 relating to the recovery from Mr Csanád Szegedi of the sum of EUR 264 196,11 and the related debit note of 19 December 2017 in so far as they relate to sums paid in respect of travel expenses in the sum of EUR 8 273,83;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Mr Szegedi and the European Parliament each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 182, 28.5.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2019 — Strabag Belgium v Parliament

(Case T-299/18) (1)

(Public works contracts - Tendering procedure - General contractor works in the European Parliament buildings in Brussels - Rejection of the bid of one tenderer and award of the contract to other tenderers - Abnormally low tender - Action for annulment - Measure not open to challenge - Inadmissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment)

(2019/C 280/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Strabag Belgium (Antwerp, Belgium) (represented initially by: M. Schoups, K. Lemmens and M. Lahbib, and subsequently by M. Schoups, K. Lemmens and M. Thomas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: P. López-Carceller, Z. Nagy and D. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment, first, of the Parliament decision of 19 April 2018 to maintain in force its decision of 24 November 2017 rejecting the applicant’s tender and awarding to five tenderers a framework contract involving general contractor works for Parliament buildings in Brussels (call for tenders 06D 20/2017/M036) and, secondly, of the addendum to the Parliament’s tender assessment report of 26 March 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Strabag Belgium to pay the costs, including those related to the interlocutory proceedings.

(1) OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2019 — Pshonka v Council

(Case T-289/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted with regard to the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Obligation on the Council to check that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in observance of the rights of the defence and of the right to effective judicial protection)

(2019/C 328/54)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Artem Viktorovych Pshonka (Kramatorsk, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and R. Pekař, Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 48), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 5), in so far as the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine in so far Artem Viktorovych Pshonka’s name was maintained on the list of person, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 249, 16.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2019 — Sandrone v EUIPO — J. Garcia Carrion (Luciano Sandrone)

(Case T-268/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Luciano Sandrone - Earlier EU word mark DON LUCIANO - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Application for an EU word mark consisting of a first name and of a surname - Earlier mark consisting of an honorific title and a first name - Neutrality of the conceptual comparison - No likelihood of confusion)

(2019/C 305/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Luciano Sandrone (Barolo, Italy) (represented by: A. Borra, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Kompari and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: J. García Carrión, SA (Jumilla, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 February 2018 (Case R 1207/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between J. García Carrión and Luciano Sandrone.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 February 2018 (Case R 1207/2017-2);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Luciano Sandrone.

(1) OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2019 — TrekStor v EUIPO (Theatre)

(Case T-399/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Theatre - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 399/60)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: TrekStor Ltd (Hong-Kong, China) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch, M. Alber and N. Willich, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2018 (Case R 2238/2017-2) relating to an application for registration of the word sign Theatre as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders TrekStor Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.