ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 –Kampete v Council

(Case T-102/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons subject to restrictive measures - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 452/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Ilunga Kampete (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: H. Marcos Fraile and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 134), and, second, Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 1) in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Ilunga Kampete to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Global Translation Solutions v Commission

(Case T-404/20) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Translation services - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Award of the contract to another tenderer - Award criteria - Method of evaluation - Manifest error of assessment - Equal treatment - Transparency - Obligation to state reasons - Duty of diligence - Principle of sound administration)

(2021/C 481/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Global Translation Solutions ltd. (Valletta, Malta) (represented by: C. Mifsud-Bonnici, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Katsimerou, L. André and M. Ilkova, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s decision contained in the letter of 17 April 2020 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant for Lot 22 (EN>MT) in tendering procedure TRAD 19 and awarding that lot to another tenderer, and for annulment of ‘all related decisions’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Global Translation Solutions ltd. to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2021 — Asian Gear v EUIPO — Multimox (Scooter)

(Case T-686/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered community design representing a scooter - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Disclosure of the earlier design - Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2021/C 471/68)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Asian Gear BV (Pijnacker, Netherlands) (represented by: B. Gravendeel, 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: Multimox Holding BV (Rijen, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Schmidt, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 September 2020 (Case R 1043/2018-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Asian Gear and Multimox Holding.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Asian Gear BV to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Multimox Holding BV for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 35, 1.2.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — AV and AW v Parliament

(Case T-43/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary measure - Downgrading - Rights of the defence - Principle of good administration - Manifest error of assessment)

(2021/C 490/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: AV and AW (represented by: L. Levi, S. Rodrigues and J. Martins, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Scafarto and I. Lázaro Betancor, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the Parliament’s decisions of 21 June 2019 imposing on one of the applicants a disciplinary penalty of downgrading by four grades, from AST 6 to AST 2, and, on the other applicant, a disciplinary penalty of downgrading by two grades, from AST 8 to AST 6, and, in so far as necessary, of the Parliament’s decisions of 28 November 2019 rejecting the applicants’ complaints of 17 July 2019 against the decisions of 21 June 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders AV and AW to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2021 — Unimax Stationery v EUIPO — Mitsubishi Pencil (UNI-MAX)

(Case T-591/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark UNI-MAX - Earlier EU figurative marks uni and uni-ball - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 490/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Unimax Stationery (Daman, India) (represented by: A. Hempel and C. Grünewald, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mitsubishi Pencil Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J. Fesenmair, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 July 2020 (Case R 371/2020-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mitsubishi Pencil and Unimax Stationery.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Unimax Stationery to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 390, 16.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Nissan Motor v EUIPO — VDL Groep (VDL E-POWER)

(Case T-755/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark VDL E-POWER - Earlier national figurative marks e-POWER - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 2/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Nissan Motor Co. Ltd (Yokohama-shi, Japan) (represented by: P. Martini-Berthon, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: VDL Groep BV (Eindhoven, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Rijks, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 October 2020 (Case R 2914/2019-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Nissan Motor and VDL Groep.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nissan Motor Co. Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and of VDL Groep BV.

(1) OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2021 — St. Hippolyt v EUIPO — Elephant (Strong like nature)

(Case T-352/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Strong like nature - Earlier EU figurative mark STRONG NATURE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 502/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH (Dielheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Preduzeće za proizvodnju, unutrašnju i spoljnu trgovinu Elephant Co. d.o.o. (Belgrade, Serbia) (represented by: D. Cañadas Arcas, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2020 (Case R 1909/2019-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Preduzeće za proizvodnju, unutrašnju i spoljnu trgovinu Elephant and St. Hippolyt Holding.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders St. Hippolyt Holding GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Eternit v EUIPO — Eternit Österreich (Building panel)

(Case T-193/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered community design representing a building panel - Earlier design representing a panel for a noise-reduction wall - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Sector concerned - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - No different overall impression - Relevance of goods actually marketed - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2022/C 24/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Eternit (Kapelle-op-den-Bos, Belgium) (represented by: J. Muyldermans and P. Maeyaert, lawyers)

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: Eternit Österreich GmbH (Vöcklabruck, Austria) (represented by: M. Prohaska-Marchried, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 February 2020 (Case R 1661/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Eternit Österreich and Eternit.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Frito-Lay Trading Company (MONSTER and MONSTER ENERGY)

(Joined Cases T-758/20 and T-759/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word marks MONSTER and MONSTER ENERGY - Genuine use of the marks - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the marks were registered - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 11/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Frito-Lay Trading Company GmbH (Bern, Switzerland) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Re:

Two actions brought against the decisions of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2020 (Cases R 2927/2019-2 and R 2928/2019-2), relating to two revocation proceedings between Frito-Lay Trading Company and Monster Energy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders Monster Energy Co. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Hamers v Cedefop

(Case T-159/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Investigation conducted by OLAF - Transmission to national judicial authorities of information relating to facts liable to lead to criminal proceedings - National criminal proceedings - Acquittal - Cedefop’s conduct in relation to the national criminal proceedings - Rejection of the claim for compensation - Action for annulment and damages - Conflict of interests - Presumption of innocence - Powers of Cedefop’s Board of Appeal)

(2022/C 84/49)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Helene Hamers (Angelochori, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, A. Politis, M. Rodopoulos and A. Skoulikis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (represented by: J. Siebel and L. Zacheilas, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur and C. Meidanis, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of Cedefop’s implied decision of 19 January 2020 rejecting the complaint concerning a claim for compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant and, second, compensation for that damage.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Helene Hamers to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 1 December 2021 — Schmid v EUIPO — Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Steirisches Kürbiskernöl g.g.A)

(Case T-700/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Steirisches Kürbiskernöl g. g. A GESCHÜTZTE GEOGRAFISCHE ANGABE - Absolute ground for refusal - Trade mark including badges, emblems or escutcheons - Emblem of one of the areas of action of the European Union - Protected geographical indications - Article 7(1)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(i) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 51/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Gabriele Schmid (Halbenrain, Austria) (represented by: A. Ginzburg, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Graz, Austria) (represented by: I. Hödl, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 September 2020 (Case R 2186/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark and Ms Schmid.

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 23 September 2020 (Case R 2186/2019-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ms Gabriele Schmid;

3. Orders Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark to bear its own costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2022 — Canisius v EUIPO — Beiersdorf (CCLABELLE VIENNA)

(Case T-694/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark CCLABELLE VIENNA - Earlier EU word mark LABELLO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 128/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Maria Alexandra Canisius (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: H. Asenbauer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Frydendahl and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Beiersdorf AG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: J. Fuhrmann and V. von Bomhard, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2020 (Case R 2233/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Beiersdorf and Ms Canisius.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Maria Alexandra Canisius to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — MO v Council

(Case T-587/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Compulsory reassignment - 2019 Appraisal exercise - Right to be heard - Liability)

(2022/C 95/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: MO (represented by: A. Guillerme, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, M. Alver and K. Kouri, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for, first, annulment of the decision of the Council of 19 November 2019 to reassign the applicant to the [confidential] unit and of the applicant’s appraisal report for 2019 and, second, compensation in respect of the material and non-material damage the applicant allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders MO to the costs.

(1) OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — Genekam Biotechnology v Commission

(Case T-579/20) (1)

(Grant agreement concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Fibrogelnet project - Recovery of an amount receivable - Risk avoidance mechanism - Amount receivable effectively recovered from the Guarantee Fund - Decision establishing a pecuniary obligation and forming an enforceable decision - Article 299 TFEU - Competence of the author of the act - Termination of the applicant’s participation in the project - Eligible costs - Reports and deliverables)

(2022/C 198/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Genekam Biotechnology AG (Duisburg, Germany) (represented by: S. Hertwig, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. André, J. Estrada de Solà and R. Pethke, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 5548 final of 7 August 2020 establishing a pecuniary obligation and forming an enforceable decision against the applicant for the amount of EUR 119 659,55, together with default interest, arising from the grant that it received in respect of the Fibrogelnet project.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Genekam Biotechnology AG to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 414, 30.11.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — Mood Media Netherlands v EUIPO — Tailoradio (MOOD MEDIA)

(Case T-615/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark MOOD MEDIA - 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) - Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use)

(2022/C 191/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mood Media Netherlands BV (Naarden, Netherlands) (represented by: A.M. Pecoraro, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Tailoradio Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. Franzosi, A. Sobol, F. Santonocito and S. Bernardini, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 July 2020 (Case R 1767/2019-1), relating to revocation proceedings between Tailoradio and Mood Media Netherlands.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 July 2020 (Case R 1767/2019-1);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mood Media Netherlands BV;

4. Orders Tailoradio Srl to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 390, 16.11.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2022 — OG v EDA

(Case T-632/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - EDA staff - Vacancy notice - Head of Unit post - Rejection of application - Obligation to state reasons - Equal treatment - Transparency - Objectivity - Principle of sound administration - Infringement of the vacancy notice - Manifest error of assessment - Liability - Non-material harm)

(2022/C 284/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: OG (represented by: S. Pappas and N. Kyriazopoulou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Defence Agency (represented by: C. Ribeiro, acting as Agent, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By her action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Defence Agency (EDA) of 13 December 2019 by which she was not placed on the reserve list for the position of Head of the IT Unit in the Corporate Services Directorate and, secondly, compensation for the harm she claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders OG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — Correia v EESC

(Case T-750/20) (1)

(Civil service - EESC staff - Members of the temporary staff - Request for career reconstitution - Rejection of the request - Action for annulment - Proper conduct of the pre-litigation procedure - Time limit for lodging a complaint - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Equal treatment - Legal certainty - Entitlement to reasonable career prospects - Absence of a right to career constitution - Obligation to carry out a consideration of the comparative merits - Liability - Non-material damage)

(2022/C 237/60)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Paula Correia (Woluwe-Saint-Étienne, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Economic and Social Committee (represented by: M. Pascua Mateo, K. Gambino, X. Chamodraka, A. Carvajal García-Valdecasas and L. Camarena Januzec, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, the annulment of the decision of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) of 8 April 2020 by which the EESC rejected her request for career reconstitution, second, an order that the EESC pay remuneration arrears and derived financial benefits, together with late payment interest and, third, compensation for the non-material damage that she claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) of 8 April 2020 rejecting Ms Paula Correia’s request for career constitution;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the EESC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.