ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 July 2010 — The Wellcome Foundation Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Serono Genetics Institute SA

(Case C-461/09 P) (1)

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Word mark FAMOXIN - Application for a declaration of invalidity made by the proprietor of the national word mark LAMOXIN - Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity)

(2010/C 288/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Wellcome Foundation Ltd (represented by: R. Gilbey, avocat)

Other parties to the main proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent), Serono Genetics Institute SA

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 23 September 2009 in Joined Cases T-493/07, T-26/08 and T-27/08 GlaxoSmithkline — Laboratórios Wellcome de Portugal — The Wellcome Foundation v OHIM, in which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action for annulment brought by the proprietor of the national word mark ‘LANOXIN’ for goods in Class 5 against Decision R 8/2007-1 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 14 September 2007 dismissing the appeal brought against the decision of the Cancellation Division rejecting the application for a declaration of invalidity submitted by the applicant concerning the Community word mark ‘FAMOXIN’ for goods and services in Class 5

Operative part of the order

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders The Wellcome Foundation Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 37, 13.02.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 234/18

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 4 March 2010 — Kaul GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Bayer AG

(Case C-193/09 P) (1)

(Appeal - Application for registration of Community word mark ARCOL - Opposition by proprietor of Community word mark CAPOL - Implementation by OHIM of a judgment annulling a decision of its Boards of Appeal - Right to be heard - Likelihood of confusion - Minimal degree of similarity of the marks required - Rejection for manifest irrelevance of new evidence adduced before the Board of Appeal - Articles 8(1)(b), 61(2), 63(6), 73, second sentence, and 74(2) of Regulation No 40/94)

2010/C 234/27

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Kaul GmbH (represented by: R. Kunze, Rechtsanwalt and Solicitor)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent), Bayer AG

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 25 March 2009 in Case T-402/07 Kaul GmbH v OHIM by which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action for annulment brought by the proprietor of the Community word mark ‘CAPOL’ for goods in Class 1 against Decision R 782/2000-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 1 August 2007, dismissing for the second time the appeal brought against the decision of the Opposition Division which rejected the opposition brought against the application for registration of the Community word mark ‘ARCOL’ for goods in Classes 1, 17 and 20, following the annulment in Case C-29/05 P OHIM v Kaul of the Third Board of Appeal’s initial decision to reject the opposition

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Kaul GmbH shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 193, 15.8.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/24

Order of the President of the Court of 1 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale della Campania (Italy)) — Lucio Rubano v Regione Campania, Comune di Cusano Mutri

(Case C-60/09) (1)

2011/C 63/44

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 90, 18.4.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 346/38

Order of the President of the Court of 1 September 2010 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-531/09) (1)

()

2010/C 346/70

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/7

Order of the Court of 23 March 2011 — Republic of Estonia v European Commission, Republic of Latvia

(Case C-535/09 P) (1)

(Appeal - Sugar - Determination of surplus quantities of sugar, isoglucose and fructose for the new Member States)

2011/C 252/11

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Appellant: Republic of Estonia (represented by: L. Uibo, acting as Agent)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and E. Randvere, acting as Agents), Republic of Latvia (represented by: K. Drevina and K. Krasovska, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of 2 October 2009 in Case T-324/05 Estonia v Commission dismissing the appellant’s action for annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 832/2005 of 31 May 2005 on the determination of surplus quantities of sugar, isoglucose and fructose for the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (OJ 2005 L 138, p. 3)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. The Republic of Estonia shall bear its own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

3. The Republic of Latvia shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 63, 13.3.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 120/2

Order of the Court of 17 December 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Piemonte, Italy) — Maurizio Polisseni v Azienda Sanitaria Locale N.14 V.C.O., Antonio Giuliano

(Case C-217/09) (1)

(Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Public health - Pharmacies - Proximity - Supply of the population with medicines - Authorisation to operate - Territorial distribution of pharmacies - Establishment of limits based on a criterion of demographic density - Minimum distance between pharmacies)

2011/C 120/02

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Piemonte

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Maurizio Polisseni.

Defendants: Azienda Sanitaria Locale N.14 V.C.O., Antonio Giuliano

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Piemonte — Interpretation of Arts 43, 152 and 153 EC — Opening of new pharmacies — National legislation making authorisation for the moving of a pharmacy subject to the keeping of a minimum distance between one pharmacy and another

Operative part of the order

1. Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted in principle as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which places limits on the sitting of pharmacies by providing that: — in each pharmaceutical area, only one pharmacy may be created, in principle, per 4 000 or 5 000 inhabitants; and — each pharmacy must keep a minimum distance from existing pharmacies, that distance being, as a general rule, 200 metres.

2. However, Article 49 TFEU precludes such national legislation in so far as the basic rules of 4 000 or 5 000 inhabitants and 200 metres prevent the creation, in any geographical area with particular demographic characteristics, of a sufficient number of pharmacies capable of providing an appropriate pharmaceutical service, which it is for the national court to verify.

(1) OJ C 205, 29.8.2009.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 63/15

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 October 2010 — REWE-Zentral AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG

(Case C-22/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark Clina - Earlier Community word mark CLINAIR - Refusal of registration - Relative ground for refusal - Examination of the likelihood of confusion - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b))

2011/C 63/27

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: REWE-Zentral AG (represented by: M. Kinkeldey and A. Bognár, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: R. Pethke, acting as Agent), Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (represented by: N. Lützenrath, Rechtsanwalt)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Sixth Chamber) of 11 November 2009 in Case T-150/08 REWE-Zentral v OHIM, by which the Court dismissed the action for annulment brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 February 2008 refusing the registration of the word sign ‘Clina’ as a Community trade mark for certain goods in Classes 3 and 21 by upholding the opposition brought by the proprietor of the earlier Community word mark ‘CLINAIR’ — Likelihood of confusion between two marks — Failure to carry out a global assessment of the relevant factors in examining the likelihood of confusion — Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. REWE-Zentral AG is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 80, 27.03.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 30/31

Order of the President of the Court of 8 November 2010 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-44/10) (1)

()

2011/C 30/51

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 100, 17.04.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 120/10

Order of the President of the Court of 18 January 2011 — European Commission v Republic of Poland

(Case C-304/10) (1)

2011/C 120/24

Language of the case: Polish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 246, 11.09.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 89/13

Order of the President of the Court of 3 January 2011 — European Commission v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-398/10) (1)

2011/C 89/30

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 274, 9.10.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 186/10

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 March 2011 — Ravensburger AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Educa Borras SA

(Case C-370/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Figurative mark EDUCA Memory game - Application for a declaration of invalidity made by the proprietor of the national and international word marks MEMORY - Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity by the Board of Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) - Relative grounds for refusal)

2011/C 186/17

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Ravensburger AG (represented by: H. Harte-Bavendamm and M. Goldmann, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Botis, Agent), Educa Borras SA

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 19 May 2010 in Case T-243/08 Ravensburger AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) by which the General Court dismissed an action for annulment brought by the proprietor of the national and international word marks ‘MEMORY’ for goods in Class 28 against Decision R 597/2007-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 8 April 2008 annulling the decision of the Cancellation Decision, which upheld the application for a declaration of invalidity lodged by the applicant against the figurative mark ‘EDUCA Memory Game’ for goods in Class 28

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Ravensburger AG shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 260, 25.9.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 120/8

Order of the President of the Court of 27 January 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln — Germany) — Hannelore Adams v Germanwings GmbH

(Case C-266/10) (1)

2011/C 120/16

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 209, 31.7.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/10

Order of the Court of 11 May 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria)) — Tony Georgiev Semerdzhiev v ET Del-Pi-Krasimira Mancheva

(Case C-32/10) (1)

(Article 92(1) of the Rules of Procedure - Directive 90/314/EEC - Package travel, package holidays and package tours - Facts preceding the accession of the Republic of Bulgaria to the European Union - Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the Court to answer the questions referred)

2011/C 232/16

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Tony Georgiev Semerdzhiev

Defendant: ET Del-Pi-Krasimira Mancheva

Intervening party: ZAD Bulstrad VIG

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Varhoven kasatsionen sad — Interpretation of Articles 2(1)(c), 4(1)(b)(iv) and 5(2)(3) and (4) of Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours (OJ 1990 L 158, p. 59) — Concept of ‘other tourist services’ not ancillary to transport or accommodation to be borne by the organiser — Obligation for the organiser to conclude an individual insurance contract for each consumer and to provide the consumer with the original before travel — Obligation for the organiser to conclude an individual insurance contract covering costs of repatriation in case of accident — Concept of ‘damage’ resulting for the consumer from the failure to perform or the improper performance of the contract — Non-material damages included

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly has no jurisdiction to rule on the questions referred by the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria).

(1) OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 211/21

Order of the President of the Court of 7 April 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Salzburg — Austria) — Harald Jung and Gerald Hellweger v Magistrat der Stadt Salzburg, other party to the proceedings: Finanzamt Salzburg-Stadt

(Case C-241/10) (1)

2011/C 211/41

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 221, 14.8.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/27

Order of the President of the Court of 8 June 2011 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d’Instance de Dax (France)) — AG2R Prévoyance v SARL Bourdil (C-97/10), SARL Boucalaise de Boulangerie (C-98/10), SARL Baba-Pom (C-99/10)

(Joined Cases C-97/10 to C-99/10) (1)

2011/C 252/53

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the cases be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 113, 1.5.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/10

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 March 2011 — Ravensburger AG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) — Educa Borras SA

(Case C-369/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Community word mark MEMORY - Invalidity proceedings - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(c))

2011/C 252/18

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Ravensburger AG (represented by: H. Harte-Bavendamm and M. Goldmann, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Botis, Agent), Educa Borras SA

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 19 May 2010 in Case T-108/09 Ravensburger v OHIM, by which the Court dismissed the action brought against Decision R 305/2008-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 8 January 2009, dismissing the appeal brought against the Cancellation Division’s decision which declares the word mark ‘MEMORY’ invalid, in respect of goods in Classes 9 and 28, in the context of the application for a declaration of invalidity filed by Educa Borras

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Ravensburger AG shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 260, 25.9.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 340/14

Order of the President of the Court of 8 August 2011 — European Commission v French Republic

(Case C-597/10) (1)

2011/C 340/25

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 55, 19.2.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 269/38

Order of the President of the Court of 1 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands)) — G.A.P. Peeters-van Maasdijk v Raad van Bestuur van het Uitvoeringsinstituut werknemersverzekeringen

(Case C-455/10) (1)

2011/C 269/80

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 328, 4.12.2010.
1.

Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the acts of temporary reproduction carried out during a ‘data capture’ process, such as those in issue in the main proceedings, fulfil the condition that those acts must constitute an integral and essential part of a technological process, notwithstanding the fact that they initiate and terminate that process and involve human intervention; fulfil the condition that those acts of reproduction must pursue a sole purpose, namely to enable the lawful use of a protected work or a protected subject-matter; fulfil the condition that those acts must not have an independent economic significance provided, first, that the implementation of those acts does not enable the generation of an additional profit going beyond that derived from the lawful use of the protected work and, secondly, that the acts of temporary reproduction do not lead to a modification of that work.
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 12 September 2011 — Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE v European Commission

(Case C-289/10 P) (1)

(Appeal - Public service contracts - Call for tenders - Analysis, development, maintenance and support of telematic systems for the monitoring of products subject to excise duty - Rejection of the tender - Failure to state reasons for that rejection)

(2012/C 25/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin, acting as Agent)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 19 March 2010 in Case T-50/05 Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed an action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 18 November 2004 rejecting the appellant’s tender in a tendering procedure relating to the analysis, development, maintenance and support of telematic systems to control the movement of products subject to excise duty and awarding the contract to another tenderer

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 246, 11.9.2010.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 109/3

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 22 November 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bayerischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Germany) — Wolfgang Köppl v Freistaat Bayern

(Case C-590/10) (1)

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Directive 91/439/EEC - Article 1(2) and Article 8(2) and (4) - Article 7(1) - Mutual recognition of driving licences - Withdrawal of national driving authorisation - Category B driving licence issued by another Member State - Disregard of the residence requirement - Subsequent issue, by the same Member State, of a Category C driving licence - Observance of the residence requirement - Whether obligatory to hold a valid licence for Category B vehicles at time of issue of licence for Category C vehicles)

2012/C 109/04

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bayerischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Wolfgang Köppl

Defendant: Freistaat Bayern

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bayerischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Interpretation, in the light of Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, of Article 1(2) and Article 8(2) and (4) of Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences (OJ 1991 L 237, p. 1) — Category B driving licence issued by a Member State, without regard to the residence requirement, to a national of another Member State after the withdrawal of his national licence and after the expiry of the period in which an application for a new licence is prohibited — Subsequent issue, by the same Member State, of a Category C driving licence respecting the residence requirement — Whether the Member State of residence can refuse to recognise the validity of those licences

Operative part of the order

Article 1(2) and Article 8(2) and (4) of Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences, as amended by Commission Directive 2000/56/EC of 14 September 2000, do not preclude a Member State from refusing to recognise authorisations to drive Category B and C vehicles issued by another Member State to an individual in respect of whom the first Member State has adopted measures under Article 8(2) of that directive, where the authorisation to drive Category B vehicles was issued in the second Member State without regard, as is apparent from the details specified in the driving licence issued in respect of that authorisation, to the normal residence requirement laid down in Article 7(1)(b) of that directive and where the authorisation to drive Category C vehicles was issued on the basis of the first authorisation and the non-compliance with that normal residence requirement is not apparent in the new driving licence issued in respect of that authorisation to drive Category C vehicles.

(1) OJ C 95, 26.3.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 298/18

Order of the President of the Court of 13 July 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Santa Maria Capua Vetere (Italy)) — Criminal proceedings against Yeboah Kwadwo

(Case C-120/11) (1)

2011/C 298/33

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 252/28

Order of the President of the Court of 21 June 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the the Tribunale di Rovereto (Italy)) — Criminal proceedings against John Austine

(Case C-63/11) (1)

2011/C 252/67

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 120, 16.4.2011.