ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 September 2018 –Primart v EUIPO — Bolton Cile España (PRIMART Marek Łukasiewicz)

(Case T-584/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark PRIMART Marek Łukasiewicz - Earlier national work marks PRIMA - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2018/C 381/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjno-Handlowe ‘Primart’ Marek Łukasiewicz (Wołomin, Poland) (represented by: J. Skołuda, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Bolton Cile España, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: F. Celluprica, F. Fischetti and F. De Bono, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 June 2017 (Case R 1933/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Bolton Cile España and Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjno-Handlowe ‘Primart’ Marek Łukasiewicz.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjno-Handlowe ‘Primart’ Marek Łukasiewicz to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 374, 6.11.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 4 October 2018 — Frinsa del Noroeste v EUIPO — Alimentos Friorizados (Alfrisa)

(Case T-820/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Alfrisa - Earlier EU figurative mark Frinsa F - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2018/C 427/84)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Frinsa del Noroeste, S.A. (Santa Eugenia de Ribeira, Spain) (represented by: J. Botella Reyna, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Alimentos Friorizados, SA (Barberá del Vallés, Spain) (represented by: S. de Nadal Arce, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 September 2017 (Case R 956/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Frinsa del Noroeste and Alimentos Friorizados.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Frinsa del Noroeste, S.A. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 94, 12.3.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — Ghost — Corporate Management v EUIPO (Dry Zone)

(Case T-488/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Dry Zone - Period for bringing an action - Lateness - Inadmissibility of the appeal brought before the Board of Appeal - Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 68 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No force majeure or unforeseeable circumstances - Obligations of care and diligence - Legitimate expectations))

(2018/C 408/70)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Ghost — Corporate Management SA (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: S. de Barros Araújo, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 June 2017 (Case R 683/2017-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Dry Zone as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ghost — Corporate Management SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 309, 18.9.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 October 2018 — Sárossy v Commission

(Case T-633/17) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to the procedure EU Pilot No 8572/16 CHAP(2015) 00353 - Refusal to grant access - Article 4(2), third indent, of Regulation No 1049/2001 - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of investigations - General presumption of confidentiality - Overriding public interest)

(2018/C 427/79)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Róbert Sárossy (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: D. Lazar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher and C. Ehrbar, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Hungary (represented by: M. Fehér, G. Koós and M. Tátrai, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission’s decisions of 12 June and 17 July 2017 refusing to grant the applicant access to the documents relating to the procedure EU Pilot No 8572/16 CHAP(2015) 00353.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Róbert Sárossy to bear his own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

3. Orders Hungary to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 382, 13.11.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2018 — M J Quinlan & Associates v EUIPO — Intersnack Group (Shape of a kangaroo)

(Case T-219/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Three-dimensional trade mark in the shape of a kangaroo - Declaration of revocation - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use - Nature of use)

(2018/C 427/69)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: M J Quinlan & Associates Pty Ltd (Hope Island, Queensland, Australia) (represented by: M. Freiherr von Welser and A. Bender, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: A. Söder and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Intersnack Group GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: T. Lampel, J. Heidenreich and M. Pfaff, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2017 (Case R 218/2016-2) relating to revocation proceedings between M J Quinlan & Associates Pty and Intersnack Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders M J Quinlan & Associates Pty Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2018 — Bayer v EUIPO — UNI-Pharma (SALOSPIR)

(Case T-261/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark SALOSPIR - Earlier EU figurative marks representing coloured stripes and earlier national marks Aspirin - Relative grounds for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Use of a sign of more than mere local significance in the course of trade - Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 445/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bayer AG (Leverkusen, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, S. Pétrequin and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Uni-Pharma Kleon Tsetis, Farmakeutika Ergastiria AVEE (Kifisia, Greece) (represented by: C. Chrysanthis, P.-V. Chardalia and A. Vasilogamvrou, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 February 2017 (Case R 2444/2017-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Bayer and Uni-Pharma Kleon Tsetis, Farmakeutika Ergastiria.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bayer AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Uni-Pharma Kleon Tsetis, Farmakeutika Ergastiria AVEE in the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 221, 10.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2018 — Linak v EUIPO — ChangZhou Kaidi Electrical (Electrically operated lifting column)

(Case T-368/17) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an electrically operated lifting column - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Informed user - No different overall impression - Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

(2018/C 436/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Linak A/S (Nordborg, Denmark) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by: G. Sakalaite-Orlovskiene and A. Folliard-Monguiral, and subsequently by G. Sakalaite-Orlovskiene and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: ChangZhou Kaidi Electrical Co. Ltd (Changzhou, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2017 (Case R 1412/2015-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Linak and ChangZhou Kaidi Electrical.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Linak A/S to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 November 2018 — Bopp v EUIPO (Representation of an equilateral octagon)

(Case T-460/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a blue octagonal frame - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and Article 94 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 35/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Carsten Bopp (Glashütten, Germany) (represented by: F. Pröckl, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 May 2017 (Case R 1954/2016-4) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a blue octagonal frame as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Carsten Bopp to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 300, 11.9.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 November 2018 — Mabrouk v Council

(Case T-216/17) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia - Measures taken against persons responsible for misappropriation of State funds and associated persons and entities - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Insufficient factual basis - Manifest error of assessment - Error of law - Principle of good administration - Reasonable time))

(2019/C 16/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mohamed Marouen Ben Ali Ben Mohamed Mabrouk (Tunis, Tunisia) (represented by: J.-R. Farthouat, N. Boulay and S. Crosby, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/153 of 27 January 2017 amending Decision 2011/72/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2017 L 23, p. 19), and Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/141 of 29 January 2018 amending Decision 2011/72/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2018 L 25, p. 38), in so far as those decisions concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Mohamed Marouen Ben Ali Ben Mohamed Mabrouk to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 195, 19.6.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2018 — Cyprus v EUIPO — Papouis Dairies (fino Cyprus Halloumi Cheese)

(Case T-417/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark fino Cyprus Halloumi Cheese - Earlier United Kingdom certification word mark HALLOUMI - Rejection of the opposition - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 44/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Cyprus (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, and V. Marsland, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Papouis Dairies Ltd (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 April 2017 (Case R 2650/2014-4) concerning opposition proceedings between the Republic of Cyprus and Papouis Dairies.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 20 April 2017 (Case R 2650/2014-4) concerning opposition proceedings between the Republic of Cyprus and Papouis Dairies Ltd;

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Republic of Cyprus;

3. Orders Papouis Dairies to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2018 — Khadi and Village Industries Commission v EUIPO — BNP Best Natural Products (Khadi)

(Case T-681/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark ‘Khadi’ - Production of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Absolute grounds for refusal - Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Mark containing badges, emblems or escutcheons - Article 7(1)(i) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(i) of Regulation 2017/1001) - No bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 44/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Khadi and Village Industries Commission (Mumbai Maharashtra, India) (represented by: J. Guise, N. Rose and V. Ellis, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: initially, M. Rajh and D. Walicka, and, subsequently, M. Rajh and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: BNP Best Natural Products GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Kloth and R. Briske, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 June 2017 (Case R 2083/2016-5) relating to invalidity proceedings between Khadi and Villages Industries Commission and BNP Best Natural Products.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Khadi and Village Industries Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 402, 27.11.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2018 — UP v Commission

(Case T-706/17) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Serious illness - Application f for part-time work on medical grounds - Rejection of the application - Principle of non-discrimination on grounds of disability - Right to be heard - Principle of sound administration - Duty of care - Liability))

(2019/C 82/61)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: UP (represented by: M. Casado Garcia-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the Commission Decision of 26 April 2017 refusing to grant the applicant part-time work on medical grounds and, secondly, compensation for the material and non-material harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders UP to bear his own costs as well as those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 5, 8.1.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2018 — Mubarak v Council

(Case T-358/17) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Egypt - Freezing of funds - Objectives - Criteria for inclusion of persons targeted - Maintenance of the applicant’s designation on the list of persons targeted - Factual basis - Plea of illegality - Legal basis - Proportionality - Right to a fair trial - Presumption of innocence - Principle of good administration - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Rights of defence - Right to effective judicial protection))

(2019/C 72/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mohamed Hosni Elsayed Mubarak (Cairo, Egypt) (represented by: B. Kennelly QC, J. Pobjoy, Barrister, G. Martin, M. Rushton and C. Enderby Smith, Solicitors)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by: J. Kneale and M. Veiga, and subsequently by J. Kneale and A. Sikora-Kalėda, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment (i) of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/496 of 21 March 2017 amending Decision 2011/172/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt (OJ 2017 L 76, p. 22); (ii) of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/491 of 21 March 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt (OJ 2017 L 76, p. 10); (iii) of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/466 of 21 March 2018 amending Decision 2011/172/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt (OJ 2018 L 78I, p. 3); and (iv) of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/465 of 21 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 270/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Egypt (OJ 2018 L 78I, p. 1), in so far as those acts apply to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Mohamed Hosni Elsayed Mubarak to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2019 — Haswani v Council

(Case T-477/17) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Syria - Freezing of funds - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality - Error of assessment))

(2019/C 93/64)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: George Haswani (Yabroud, Syria) (represented by: G. Karouni, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Kyriakopoulou and A. Sikora-Kalėda, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Baumgart, A. Bouquet and A. Tizzano, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 125), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/840 of 27 May 2016 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 30), Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 62), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/907 of 29 May 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 15), Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2017/1245 of 10 July 2017 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 178, p. 13), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1241 of 10 July 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2017 L 178, p. 1), Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/778 of 28 May 2018 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2018 L 131, p. 16), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/774 of 28 May 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2018 L 131, p. 1), in so far as those measures concern the applicant, and, secondly, an application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of Decision 2017/917 and Implementing Regulation 2017/907.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr George Haswani to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2019 — Mas Que Vinos Global v EUIPO — JESA (EL SEÑORITO)

(Case T-576/17) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark EL SEÑORITO - Earlier national word mark SEÑORITA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 93/67)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Mas Que Vinos Global, S.L. (Dosbarrios, Spain) (represented by: M. J. Sanmartín Sanmartín, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Jose Estevez, SA (JESA) (Jerez de la Frontera, Spain) (represented by: M. de Justo Bailey, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 June 2017 (Case R 1775/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between JESA and Mas Que Vinos Global.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mas Que Vinos Global S. L. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 357, 23.10.2017.