ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 1 February 2006 – Endesa v Commission

(Case T-417/05 R)

Application for interim measures – Control of concentrations between undertakings – Urgency

1. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Cumulative requirements – Weighing-up of all the interests at stake (Art. 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 26-27)

2. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Burden of proof (Art. 243 EC) (see paras 32-33)

3. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 243 EC) (see paras 37-40)

4. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 76a) (see paras 41, 43-44, 47-50)

5. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 243 EC; Council Regulation No 139/2004, Art. 8(3)) (see paras 52-57)

6. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 243 EC) (see paras 59-60)

7. Applications for interim measures – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 243 EC) (see paras 61-66)

Re:

APPLICATION for an order, first, for suspension of the operation of the Commission’s letter of 15 November 2005 declaring that a concentration between Gas Natural SDG, SA, and Endesa, SA, does not have a Community dimension within the meaning of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 2004 L 24, p. 1), and, secondly, for the adoption of other interim measures

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2006 – Weber v Commission

(Case T-290/05)

Access to documents of the Community institutions – Refusal – Application initiating proceedings – Manifest inadmissibility – No need to adjudicate

1. Actions for annulment – Jurisdiction of the Community judicature – Direction issued to an institution – Not permissible (Art. 230 EC) (see para. 20)

2. Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Reformulation of the initial pleadings – Conditions (see para. 22)

3. Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 44(1)(c) and (d)) (see para. 29)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Secretariat-General of the Commission of 27 May 2005, rejecting the request for access by the applicant to a letter sent by the Directorate General for Competition to the Federal German Government concerning State aid proceedings.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action as manifestly inadmissible;
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 10 January 2006 – ArchiMEDES v Commission

(Case T-397/05 R)

Interim proceedings – Application for interim measures – Arbitration clause –Urgency – None

1. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of the operation of a measure – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Prima facie case – Cumulative conditions (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see para. 35)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of the operation of a measure – Interim relief – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Burden of proof – Weighing-up of all the interests at stake (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC) (see paras 40-42)

Re:

Suspension of the operation, first, of the Commission’s decision contained in its letter of 5 October 2005 to offset debts to the detriment of the applicant; secondly, of the Commission’s decision contained in its letter of 30 August 2005 and, thirdly, of the debit note of 23 August 2005, No 3240705638

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 22 November 2007 – V v Parliament

(Case T-345/05 R III)

Application for interim measures – Waiver of immunity of a Member of the European Parliament – Application for suspension of operation – No prima facie case

1. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Urgency – Cumulative nature – Weighing-up of all the interests at stake (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 23-25)

2. Applications for interim measures – Conditions of admissibility – Application – Formal requirements (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 44(1)(c) and (d)), and 104(2) and (3)) (see paras 30-32, 34)

Re:

APPLICATION for re-examination of the applicant’s first and second applications for interim measures, dismissed by orders of the President of the Court of First Instance on 16 March and 27 June 2007 in Case T‑345/05 R and T‑345/05 R II, V v Parliament , not published in the ECR.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2007 – SP Entertainment Development v Commission

(Case T-44/05)

State aid – Actionable measure – Inadmissibility

Actions for annulment – Actionable measures –Meaning – Measures producing binding legal effects (Arts 88(2) EC and 230 EC) (see paras 19-22, 25)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of the decision contained in a letter from the Commission of 20 October 2004 concerning the recovery of State aid granted by the German authorities to Space Park Development GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Applications for interim measures

–

Suspension of operation of a measure

–

Order provisionally suspending operation of a European Parliament decision until delivery of the order concluding the interim proceedings

–

Indication by the Parliament of its intention not to implement that decision further

–

No need to adjudicate (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 105(2)) (see paras 9-12

)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for interim measures seeking, in substance, suspension of operation of the decision of the European Parliament dated 1 December 2006 accepting the tender submitted by Mostra and rejecting the applicant’s tender in the context of call for tenders EP/DGINFO/WEBTV/2006/2003 and also of the implementation of any contract entered into with Mostra, pending the decision of the Court in the main action.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Finds no further need to adjudicate on the application for interim measures;

2. Reserves the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Claim for compensation – Action brought by undertakings prosecuted and subject to administrative penalties for issuing false invoices for the purpose of obtaining Community financial aid (Arts 226 EC and 288, second para., EC) (see para. 25)

2. Non-contractual liability – Conditions (Arts 226 EC and 288, second para., EC) (see paras 29-30)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for compensation for material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicants on account of, first, criminal proceedings brought in Greece against their manager, and, second, the decision of the Commission to take no action on the complaint by Lademporiki, lodged on 29 July 2004.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the applicants to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for annulment – Jurisdiction of the Community judicature – Direction issued to an institution – Not permissible (Arts 231 EC and 233 EC) (see paras 25-26)

2. Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230, fourth para., EC; Commission Regulation No 874/2004, Art. 9, second para.) (see paras 32, 44-56)

Subject of the case

Re:

ACTION for annulment of the Commission’s decision, pursuant to Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 of 28 April 2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the .eu Top Level Domain and the principles governing registration (OJ 2004 L 162, p. 40), to reserve the domain name ‘galileo.eu’ for Community institutions and bodies.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Orders Galileo Lebensmittel GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Applications for interim measures – Conditions of admissibility – Direct connection between the action in the main proceedings and the appreciation for interim measures – Summary statement of pleas (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 44(1) and 104(2)) (see para. 33-37)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Suspension of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding with immediate recovery of a fine – Conditions for granting – Exceptional circumstances (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 53-58, 61, 64, 66-68, 76-77)

3. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Suspension of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding with immediate recovery of a fine – Whether the undertaking’s group situation to be taken into account (Art. 242 EC) (see paras 83-84, 86-87, 89, 91, 93, 95)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the operation of Article 2(c) and (d) of the Commission Decision of 20 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F-1/38.121 – Fittings) and, in particular, for dispensation from the obligation to provide a bank guarantee imposed by the Commission’s letter of 4 October 2006 notifying the applicants of the decision.

Operative part

Operative part

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.

2. Costs are reserved.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Meaning – Measures producing binding legal effects (Art. 230, first para., EC; Council Directive 92/43, Arts 4(2), (5) and 6; Commission Decision 2006/613, Art. 1, second para., and Annexes 1, 2 and 3) (see paras 24-28)

2. Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230, fourth para., EC; Council Directive 92/43, Arts 4(5) and 6; Commission Decision 2006/613, Annex 1) (see paras 35-40)

Subject of the case

Re:

Partial annulment of Commission Decision 2006/613/EC of 19 July 2006 adopting, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC, the list of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region (OJ 2006 L 259, p. 1), in so far as it declares the site designated as ‘Artos de El Ejido’, which includes lands belonging to the applicants, to be a site of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Orders Manuel José Espinosa Labella, Josefa Labella Dávalos, María Pilar Espinosa Labella, María José Espinosa Labella, Tomasa Peñuela Ortiz, Tomás Espinosa Peñuela, Francisco José Espinosa Peñuela, Juan Manuel Espinosa Peñuela, María Lourdes Espinosa Peñuela, Adela Espinosa Peñuela, Jorge Jesús Espinosa Peñuela and the heirs of Rafael Espinosa Peñuela to bear their own costs and to pay those of the Commission;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Meaning – Measures producing binding legal effects (Art. 230 EC) (see paras 52, 55‑56)

2. Actions for annulment – Action against a decision confirming two decisions not challenged within the time-limits (Art. 230 EC) (see paras 57‑59)

Subject of the case

Re:

ANNULMENT of Commission Decision C(2006) 3181 final of 6 July 2006 ending a project concerning conservation actions in the Northern Pindos National Park (Greece) (Ellas – LIFE03/NAT/GR/000089) and ordering reimbursement of the advance paid to the applicant in respect of the Community financial assistance which had been granted to it in implementation of Commission Decision C(2003) 2919 final of 4 September 2003.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Orders Etairia prostasias kai diakhirisis fisikou perivallontos kai agrias zois ‘Arktouros’ to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Commission.
2.

Procedure — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Action for compensation for damage caused by a Community institution (Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21 and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 44(1)(c)) (see paras 47-51)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Procedure – Legal basis of an action – Choice a matter for the applicant and not the Community judicature (see paras 32-33)

2. Actions for annulment – Action relating in reality to a contractual dispute – Reclassification of the action – Exclusion (Arts 230 EC, 238 EC and 249 EC) (see paras 34-39)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of the debit note of 4 May 2006 by which the Commission sought repayment from the applicant of sums paid in performance of the contract concerning Community financing of the project ‘Republika Srpska 1998: Improvement of living standards to promote the return of refugees and displaced persons’ (Contract RE/YOU/03/04/98), concluded within the framework of the Obnova Programme.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application.

2. Orders Austrian Relief Program – Verein für Not- und Katastrophenhilfe to pay the costs.
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 28 March 2007 – IBP and International Building Products France v Commission

(Case T‑384/06 R)

Applications for interim measures – Application for suspension of operation of a measure – Competition – Payment of a fine – Bank guarantee – Lack of urgency

1. Applications for interim measures – Conditions of admissibility – Direct connection between the action in the main proceedings and the appreciation for interim measures – Summary statement of pleas (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 44(1) and 104(2)) (see para. 33-37)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Suspension of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding with immediate recovery of a fine – Conditions for granting – Exceptional circumstances (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 53-58, 61, 64, 66-68, 76-77)

3. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Suspension of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding with immediate recovery of a fine – Whether the undertaking’s group situation to be taken into account (Art. 242 EC) (see paras 83-84, 86-87, 89, 91, 93, 95)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the operation of Article 2(c) and (d) of the Commission Decision of 20 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F-1/38.121 – Fittings) and, in particular, for dispensation from the obligation to provide a bank guarantee imposed by the Commission’s letter of 4 October 2006 notifying the applicants of the decision.

Operative part

The application for interim measures is dismissed.
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 13 December 2006 – Huta Częstochowa v Commission

(Case T‑288/06 R)

Application for interim measures – Application for suspension of operation –State aid – Admissibility

1. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Urgency – Cumulative nature – Weighing-up of all the interests at stake (Arts 225(1) EC, 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see para. 11)

2. Applications for interim measures – Conditions of admissibility – Application – Formal requirements (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2) and (3)) (see para. 12)

3. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see para. 13)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of operation of Article 3 of the Commission decision of 5 July 2005 concerning State aid granted to the steel producer Huta Częstochowa SA in Case No C 20/04, and for the joinder of that application with the application for suspension of operation brought by ISD Polska sp. Z o.o.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 18 February 2008 – Altana Pharma v OHIM – Avensa (PNEUMO UPDATE

(Case T-327/06)

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark PNEUMO UPDATE – Earlier national word mark Pneumo – Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly wholly unfounded in law

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 33-36)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Chamber of the Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 September 2006 (Case R 668/2005‑2) concerning opposition proceedings between Avensa AG and Altana Pharma AG.

Information relating to the case

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Altana Pharma AG Community trade mark sought: Word mark PNEUMO UPDATE for goods and services in Classes 5, 9, 16, 35, 38 and 41 – Application No 2462049 Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Avensa AG Mark or sign cited in opposition: German word mark Pneumo for goods in Class 5, the opposition being directed only at registration for Class 5 Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed





Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly wholly unfounded in law;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 28 August 2007 – Galileo Lebensmittel v Commission

(Case T-46/06)

Action for annulment – Implementation of the Top Level Domain ‘eu’ – Registration of the domain name ‘galileo.eu’ – Use restricted to the institutions and bodies of the Community – Locus standi – Inadmissibility

1. Actions for annulment – Jurisdiction of the Community judicature – Direction issued to an institution – Not permissible (Arts 231 EC and 233 EC) (see paras 25-26)

2. Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230, fourth para., EC; Commission Regulation No 874/2004, Art. 9, second para.) (see paras 32, 44-56)

Re:

ACTION for annulment of the Commission’s decision, pursuant to Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 of 28 April 2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the .eu Top Level Domain and the principles governing registration (OJ 2004 L 162, p. 40), to reserve the domain name ‘galileo.eu’ for Community institutions and bodies.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) of 13 November 2008 – Lemaître Sécurité v Commission

(Case T-301/06)

Action for annulment – Dumping – Imports of footwear with a protective toecap originating in the People’s Republic of China and India – Commission Decision closing the anti-dumping proceeding – Not individually concerned – Manifest inadmissibility

1. Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230, fourth para., EC; Council Regulation No 384/96, Arts 5(10) and 6(5); Commission Decision No 2006/582) (see paras 23-29)

2. Actions for annulment – Jurisdiction of the Community judicature – Unlimited jurisdiction – Direction issued to an institution – Not permissible (Arts 229 EC and 230 EC) (see para. 31)

Re:

ANNULMENT of Commission Decision No 2006/582/EC of 28 August 2006 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of footwear with a protective toecap, originating in the People’s Republic of China and India (OJ 2006 L 234, p. 33).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as manifestly inadmissible;

2. Orders Lemaître Sécurité SAS to pay its own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission;
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 9 July 2008 – Coffee Store v OHIM (THE COFFEE STORE)

(Case T-323/05)

Community trade mark – Application for the Community word mark THE COFFEE STORE – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 42-43)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 June 2005 (Case R 855/2004-2) concerning an application for the registration of the word sign THE COFFEE STORE as a Community trade mark.

Information relating to the case

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The Coffee Store GmbH Community trade mark sought: Word mark THE COFFEE STORE for goods and services in Classes 30, 32 and 43 Decision of the Examiner: Refusal of registration Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed





Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Applications for interim measures

–

Suspension of operation

–

Conditions governing admissibility

–

Action brought against the measure of which suspension of operation sought (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(1), first para.) (see para. 2

)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION to suspend the operation of the debit notes bearing the numbers 3240905385, 3240905379, 3240905378 and 3240905393 issued by the Commission in connection with the contracts JAI/DAP/2000/338-C, JAI/2001/DAP/161/C, JAI/2002/DAP/094-W and JAI/2003/DAP/080-W.

Operative part

Operative part

1. The application is inadmissible.

2. The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs.