ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2022 — LD v Commission

(Case T-474/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Notice of open competition EPSO/AD/371/19 - Decision of the Selection Board to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition - Criterion to assess professional experience - Compliance of criterion applied by the Selection Board with the competition notice)

(2022/C 198/49)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: LD (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Lilamand and I. Melo Sampaio, acting as Agents, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment, first, of the decision of the Selection Board of 31 October 2019 refusing the applicant’s request for review of the decision not to admit her to the next phase of the open competition EPSO/AD/371/19 and, secondly, of the decision of the appointing authority of 22 April 2020 rejecting the applicant’s complaint against that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Selection Board of 31 October 2019 refusing the request for review of LD’s exclusion from competition EPSO/AD/371/19;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — Pluscard Service v EUIPO — (PLUSCARD)

(Case T-669/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark PLUSCARD - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 171/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pluscard Service-Gesellschaft für Kreditkarten-Processing mbH (Saarbrücken, Germany) (represented by: M. Dury, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Raponi and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 September 2020 (Case R 638/2020-4), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark PLUSCARD.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Pluscard Service-Gesellschaft für Kreditkarten-Processing mbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 28, 25.1.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — OC v Commission

(Case T-384/20) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - OLAF investigation - Press release - Processing of personal data - Presumption of innocence - Confidentiality of OLAF investigations - Right to sound administration - Proportionality - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)

(2022/C 257/39)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: OC (represented by: P. Yatagantzidis and V. Cheirdaris, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and T. Adamopoulos, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the publication of OLAF press release No 13/2020 of 5 May 2020, in that it unlawfully processed her personal data and conveyed false information about her.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders OC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Perry Street Software v EUIPO — Toolstream (SCRUFFS)

(Case T-720/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark SCRUFFS - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2022/C 207/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Perry Street Software, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: M. Hawkins, Solicitor, and T. Dolde, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Toolstream Ltd (Yeovil, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Hourigan, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 September 2020 (Case R 550/2020-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Perry Street Software and Toolstream.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Perry Street Software, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Ryanair v Commission (Finnair II; Covid-19)

(Case T-657/20) (1)

(State aid - Finnish air-transport market - Aid granted by Finland to Finnair in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic - Recapitalisation of an airline by its public and private shareholders on a pro rata basis in proportion to the previously existing ownership structure - Decision not to raise any objections - Temporary Framework for State aid measures - Measure intended to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State - Derogation from certain requirements of the temporary framework - No weighing of the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition - Equal treatment - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 303/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: F.-C. Laprévote, V. Blanc, E. Vahida, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, S. Noë and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: T. Stéhelin and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: H. Leppo and A. Laine, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of European Commission Decision C(2020) 3970 final of 9 June 2020 on State aid SA.57410 (2020/N) — Finland COVID-19: Recapitalisation of Finnair.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the French Republic and the Republic of Finland to bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2022 — Foz v Council

(Case T-296/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Syria - Freezing of funds - Error of assessment - Proportionality - Right to property - Right to pursue an economic activity - Misuse of powers - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Right to a fair trial - Determination of listing criteria)

(2022/C 284/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Amer Foz (Dubai, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: L. Cloquet, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: T. Haas and M. Bishop, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2020/212 of 17 February 2020 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 43 I, p. 6), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/211 of 17 February 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 43 I, p. 1), Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/719 of 28 May 2020 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 66), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/716 of 28 May 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 1), Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/855 of 27 May 2021 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2021 L 188, p. 90) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/848 of 27 May 2021 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2021 L 188, p. 18), in so far as those acts include or maintain his name on the lists annexed to those acts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Amer Foz to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — KL v EIB

(Case T-751/20) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Sick leave - Rejection of medical certificates - Unjustified absences - Action for annulment and for damages)

(2022/C 418/26)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: KL (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: G. Faedo and I. Zanin, acting as Agents, and by A. Duron, lawyer)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of 18 May 2020 by which the European Investment Bank (EIB) rejected the medical certificates which he had produced to justify his absences from 18 March to 18 April and from 20 April to 20 May 2020 under Article 3.3 of Annex X to the EIB Staff Rules, adopted in implementation of the EIB Staff Regulations, and, secondly, compensation for the damage he claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of 18 May 2020 by which the European Investment Bank (EIB) rejected the medical certificates produced by KL to justify his absences from 18 March to 18 April and from 20 April to 20 May 2020 under Article 3.3 of Annex X to the EIB Staff Rules, adopted in implementation of the EIB Staff Regulations;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the EIB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2022 — MZ v Commission

(Case T-631/20) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 for the recruitment of administrators in the field of taxation - Limitation of the choice of the second language in which the tests are to be carried out - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Plea of illegality - Admissibility - Discrimination based on language - Special nature of the posts to be filled - Justification - Interests of the service - Proportionality)

(2022/C 340/41)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: MZ (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Lilamand, D. Milanowska and A.-C. Simon, acting as Agents, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for competition EPSO/AD/363/18 decided, after review, not to place her name on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 7 in the field of taxation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of 10 December 2019 by which the selection board for competition EPSO/AD/363/18 decided, after review, not to place the name of MZ on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators at grade AD 7 in the field of taxation;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 423, 7.12.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2022 — Sciessent v Commission

(Cases T-122/20 and T-123/20) (1)

(Biocidal products - Active substances - Silver zeolite and silver copper zeolite - Refusal of approval for product-types 2 and 7 - Article 4 and Article 19(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 - Efficacy - Active substances for use in treated articles - Assessment of the efficacy of the treated articles themselves - Competence of the Commission - Principle of non-discrimination - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations)

(2023/C 24/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sciessent LLC (Beverly, Massachusetts, United States) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem and P. Sellar, lawyers, and V. McElwee, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes and R. Lindenthal, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: R. Shahsavan Eriksson, C. Meyer-Seitz, A. Runeskjöld, M. Salborn Hodgson, H. Shev, H. Eklinder and O. Simonsson, acting as Agents), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and T. Zbihlej, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its actions pursuant to Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1960 of 26 November 2019 not approving silver zeolite as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 2 and 7 (OJ 2019 L 306, p. 42) and Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1973 of 27 November 2019 not approving silver copper zeolite as an existing active substance for use in biocidal products of product-types 2 and 7 (OJ 2019 L 307, p. 58).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-122/20 and T-123/20 for the purposes of the present judgment;

2. Dismisses the actions;

3. Orders Sciessent LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

4. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to each bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — H&H v EUIPO — Giuliani (Swisse)

(Case T-486/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Swisse - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Article 51(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No distinctive character - Trade mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - State emblem - Trade mark including badges, emblems or escutcheons - Article 7(1)(b), (g), (h) and (i) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (g), (h) and (i) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Statement of reasons for the application for a declaration of invalidity - Article 63(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Scope of the examination which has to be carried out by EUIPO - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)

(2022/C 472/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Health and Happiness (H&H) Hong Kong Ltd (Hong Kong, China) (represented by: D. Rose and L. Flascher, Solicitors, and N. Saunders KC)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Giuliani SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: S. de Bosio, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 May 2020 (Case R 2185/2019-5).

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 25 May 2020 (Case R 2185/2019-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Health and Happiness (H&H) Hong Kong Ltd;

3. Orders Giuliani SpA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 1 December 2021 — Jalkh v Parliament

(Case T-230/21) (1)

(Law governing the institutions - Member of the European Parliament - Privileges and immunities - Decision to waive parliamentary immunity - Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union - Procedure for waiving immunity - Manifest error of assessment)

(2022/C 51/45)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Jean-François Jalkh (Gretz-Armainvilliers, France) (represented by: F. Wagner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Lorenz and A.-M. Dumbrăvan, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of European Parliament decision P9_TA(2021)0092 of 25 March 2021 on the request for waiver of the immunity of the applicant (2020/2110(IMM)).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Jean-François Jalkh to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2022 — Ignacio Carrasco v EUIPO (La Hoja del Carrasco)

(Case T-209/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark La Hoja del Carrasco - Earlier national figurative mark CARRASCO, Guijuelo - 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) - Dominant and distinctive elements of the marks at issue)

(2022/C 171/46)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Ignacio Carrasco SL (Guijuelo, Spain) (represented by: J. Donoso Romero, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Santos Carrasco Manzano SA (Guijuelo) (represented by: F. Marín Riaño, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 February 2021 (Case R 175/2020-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Santos Carrasco Manzano and Ignacio Carrasco.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ignacio Carrasco SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2022 — Novelis Deutschland v EUIPO — CU.CO. (grill dish)

(Case T-173/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a grill dish - Earlier national design - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2022/C 128/33)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Novelis Deutschland GmbH (Göttingen, Germany) (represented by: U. Herberth, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Cuki Cofresco Srl (CU.CO.) (Volpiano, Italy) (represented by: L. Saglietti and E. Bianco, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 February 2021 (Case R 1856/2019-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Cuki Cofresco and Novelis Deutschland.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Novelis Deutschland GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Hesse v EUIPO — Wedl & Hofmann (Testa Rossa)

(Case T-451/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Testa Rossa - Earlier EU figurative mark TESTA ROSSA - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 207/53)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Kurt Hesse (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Krogmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Wedl & Hofmann GmbH (Mils/Hall in Tyrol, Austria) (represented by: T. Raubal, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 May 2021 (Case R 878/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Wedl & Hofmann and Mr Hesse.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Kurt Hesse to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 368, 13.9.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 March 2022 — Hrebenyuk v EUIPO (Shape of a stand-up collar)

(Case T-252/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a stand-up collar - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 198/63)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Anna Hrebenyuk (Griesheim, Germany) (represented by: H.-J. Ruhl, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 February 2021 (Case R 1902/2020-5), concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a stand-up collar as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Anna Hrebenyuk to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 263, 5.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — Vintae Luxury Wine Specialists v EUIPO — R. Lopez de Heredia Viña Tondonia (LOPEZ DE HARO)

(Case T-210/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark LOPEZ DE HARO - Earlier EU word mark LOPEZ DE HEREDIA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 244/48)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Vintae Luxury Wine Specialists SLU (Logroño, Spain) (represented by: L. Broschat García and L. Polo Flores, lawyers)

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, intervener before the General Court: R. Lopez de Heredia Viña Tondonia SA (Haro, Spain) (represented by: A. Sanz Cerralbo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 February 2021 (Case R 1741/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between R. Lopez de Heredia Viña Tondonia and Vintae Luxury Wine Specialists.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Vintae Luxury Wine Specialists SLU to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 228, 14.6.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — QA v Commission

(Case T-68/21) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Grant agreement concluded in the context of the Seventh framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) - Audit report - Language - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Proportionality - Principle of good administration)

(2022/C 237/61)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: QA (represented by: C. Roth, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Perrin and E. Stamate, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action based on Article 268 TFEU, the applicant seeks compensation for the material and non-material damage which she claims to have suffered as a result of certain comments in the final audit report of 8 January 2014 adopted by the European Commission following the financial audit carried out regarding A’s participation in project B which was funded in the context of the Seventh framework programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders QA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 138, 19.4.2021.