ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 18 February 2008 – Jurado Hermanos v OHIM (JURADO)

(Case T-410/07 R)

Applications for interim measures – Community trade mark – Removal of the trade mark from the register – Application for ‘restitutio in integrum’ – Application for suspension of the removal of the trade mark – Inadmissibility

1. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Negative administrative decision (Art. 242 EC) (see para. 31)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions of admissibility (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(1), first para., and (2)) (see para. 35)

3. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC) (see paras 49, 52-53)

4. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage for the applicant (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC) (see para. 50)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the removal from the register of Community word mark No 240218 and of the legal effects of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 September 2007 (R 866/2007-2) concerning the application for ‘ restitutio in integrum ’ brought by Jurado Hermanos, until the Court of First Instance has ruled on the action in the main proceedings.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 27 October 2008 – Pellegrini v Commission

(Case T-375/07)

Non-contractual liability – Financial intermediaries – Commission’s failure to act – Rules of law conferring rights on individuals – Action clearly devoid of legal foundation

Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Sufficiently serious breach of a rule conferring rights on individuals (Arts 235 EC and 288, para. 2, EC) (see paras 18, 22)

Re:

ACTION in non-contractual liability seeking compensation for financial loss allegedly suffered by the applicant through the Commission’s failure to ensure the full application and correct interpretation of the Community provisions governing the activities of financial intermediaries.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as clearly unfounded.
Order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 23 September 2008 – Cemex Polska v Commission

(Case T-203/07)

Action for annulment – Directive 2003/87/EC – Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading – National allocation plan in respect of emission allowances for Poland for the period from 2008 to 2012 – Decision by the Commission not to raise objections subject to certain conditions – Competence of Member States in the individual allocation of emission allowances – Lack of direct concern – Inadmissibility

1. Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them – Whether directly concerned – Criteria (Art. 230, fourth para., EC; European Parliament and Council Directive No 2003/87, Arts 9(1) and (3) and 11(2)) (see paras 22, 28, 44-45)

2. Environment – Atmospheric pollution – Directive 2003/87 – National allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances (NAP) – NAP notification procedure (Arts 175 EC and 176 EC; European Parliament and Council Directive No 2003/87, Arts 9(3), 11(1) and (2)) (see paras 32-39)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 1295 final of 26 March 2007 concerning the national allocation plan for the allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances notified by the Republic of Poland for the period from 2008 to 2012 in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 28 April 2009 – Taylor v OHIM (Representation of a right pocket)

(Case T-283/07)

Community trade mark – Application for Community figurative mark representing a right pocket – Absolute ground for refusal – Absence of distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Action manifestly devoid of any legal basis

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of any distinctive character (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 20-24)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 May 2007 (Case R 668/2006-1), concerning registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing a right pocket.

Operative part

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly devoid of any legal basis.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Applications for interim measures

–

Conditions of admissibility

–

Main application dismissed as inadmissible (Art. 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(1)) (see para. 4

)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for interim measures under Article 243 EC in relation to an action for failure to act against the Commission.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures as inadmissible;

2. Orders the applicants to bear their own costs.
Keywords



Keywords

Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Urgency – Cumulative nature (Arts 225(1) EC, 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 19-21)

2. 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 paras 24-25, 32-34)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – ‘Prima facie case’ – Urgency – Cumulative nature – Order of examination and method of verification (Arts 225(1) EC, 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 22-25)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 43-44, 48, 71)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of operation of the combined provisions of Articles 3 and 4(2) and (3) of Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/C2/38.698 – CISAC) in so far as they concern the applicant.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;

2. Reserves the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 32-34, 36-38, 43)

2. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see para. 35)

3. Application 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. 50)

4. European Communities – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions (Arts 60 EC, 301 EC and 308 EC; Council Regulation No 423/2007) (see para. 52)

5. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 53-55)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the application of paragraph 4, section B, of the Annex to Council Decision 2008/475/EC of 23 June 2008 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2008 L 163, p. 29), in so far as Melli Bank plc is included in the list of legal persons, entities and bodies whose funds and economic resources are frozen.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;

2. Reserves the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Community trade mark

–

Registration procedure

–

Observation of third parties and opposition (Commission Regulation No 2869/95, Arts 5 and 8) (see paras 27-28, 35

)

Subject of the case

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 January 2008 (Case R 1384/2007‑4) regarding opposition proceedings between Okalux GmbH and Ondex SAS.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Okalux GmbH to pay the costs.
Keywords



Keywords

Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Concept (Art. 230 EC) (see paras 25, 29)

2. Non-contractual liability – Conditions (Arts 235 EC and 288, second para., EC) (see paras 40-41)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Procedure – Time-limit for instituting proceedings – Application for legal aid

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 96(4), and 121c(1))

Summary

Article 96(4) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, pursuant to which the introduction of an application for legal aid is to suspend the period prescribed for the bringing of an action until the date of notification of the order making a decision on that application, must be applied by analogy to proceedings before the General Court following review and reference back by the Court of Justice inasmuch as the period laid down in Article 121c(1) of the Rules of Procedure is suspended by the bringing of the application for legal aid, without the assistance of a lawyer, until the date of notification of the order ruling on that application, in order to ensure its effectiveness.

(see paras 15-17)
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Unlawfulness – Damage – Causal link – One of those conditions lacking – Action dismissed in its entirety (Art. 288, second para., EC; Art. 188, second para., EA) (see para. 24)

2. Non-contractual liability – Conditions – Unlawfulness – Commission not initiating a proceeding for failure to fulfil obligations – Not constituting unlawfulness (Arts 226 EC and 288, second para., EC; Art. 141 EA) (see paras 29-30)

Subject of the case

Re:

ACTION for compensation for damage suffered as a result of the Commission’s alleged failure to adopt the measures necessary to ensure that the Kingdom of Denmark adopted the legislative and administrative provisions enabling it to comply with Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (OJ 1996 L 159, p. 1) and applied those provisions to workers involved in the nuclear accident at Thule (Greenland).

Operative part

Operative part

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Mr Heinz Helmuth Eriksen is ordered to pay the costs.
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 11 April 2008 – Cyprus v Commission

(Case T-119/08 R)

Application for interim relief – Procurement notice for a contract to encourage economic development in the northern part of Cyprus – Application for suspension of operation of the notice – No urgency

Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Arguments substantially the same as those submitted in an earlier case – Reference to the grounds for the previous decision – No urgency (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 6-7)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the operation of a procurement notice issued by the Commission for the encouragement of economic development in the northern part of Cyprus in the field of livestock rearing.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim relief;
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 20 November 2008 – SIAE v Commission

(Case T-433/08 R)

Application for interim measures – Commission decision ordering the cessation of a concerted practice in relation to the collective management of copyright – Application for suspension of operation of a measure – No urgency

1. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – ‘Prima facie case’ – Urgency – Cumulative nature – Order of examination and method of verification – Discretion of the judge dealing with the application for interim relief (Arts 225 EC, 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 23-26)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss – Burden of proof – Realisation of the damage depending on future and uncertain events (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 35, 43-47)

3. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss – Uncertainty concerning reparation of the damage in the context of a possible action for damages (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see para. 42)

4. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss – Substantial and irreversible alteration of market conditions – Criteria for assessment – Burden of proof (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 48-51)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of operation of Article 4(2) of Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/C2/38.698 – CISAC).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 27 August 2008 – Melli Bank v Council

(Case T-246/08 R)

Applications for interim measures – Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 – Restrictive measures against the Islamic Republic of Iran – Council decision – Measure to freeze funds and economic resources – Application for suspension of operation of a measure – No urgency – Absence of serious and irreparable damage

1. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 32-34, 36-38, 43)

2. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Serious and irreparable damage – Financial loss (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see para. 35)

3. Application 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. 50)

4. European Communities – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions (Arts 60 EC, 301 EC and 308 EC; Council Regulation No 423/2007) (see para. 52)

5. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Urgency (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 53-55)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the application of paragraph 4, section B, of the Annex to Council Decision 2008/475/EC of 23 June 2008 implementing Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2008 L 163, p. 29), in so far as Melli Bank plc is included in the list of legal persons, entities and bodies whose funds and economic resources are frozen.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;
Order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 29 April 2009 – S.F. Turistico Immobiliare v Council and Commission

(Case T-408/08)

Actions for annulment – Act complained of not attributable to the Council – Partial inadmissibility

Actions for annulment – Action against a decision applying guidelines for State aid for regional purposes – Act attributable solely to the Commission – Action brought against the Council and Commission – Partial inadmissibility (Art. 230 EC) (see paras 9-13)

Re:

APPLICATION to annul Commission Decision 2008/854/EC of 2 July 2008, on a State aid scheme, Regional Act No 9 of 1998 – Misapplication of aid N 272/98 (OJ 2008 L 302, p. 9).

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed as inadmissible insofar as it is against the Council of the European Union.
Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 23 December 2008 – AES‑Tisza v Commission

(Case T-468/08 R)

Application for interim measures – State aid – Commission decision declaring aid awarded by the Republic of Hungary to certain electricity producers through power purchase agreements to be incompatible with the common market – Application for suspension of operation – Lack of urgency – Weighing up of interests

1. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Cumulative nature (Arts 225 EC, 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 10-13)

2. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Serious and irreparable damage – Burden of proof – Financial loss (Art. 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 28-29, 35-39, 42, 45-47)

3. Applications for interim measures – Conditions of admissibility – Application – Formal requirements – Statement of the pleas in law establishing a prima facie case for granting the measures sought (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 104(2) and (3) and 109) (see paras 30-31)

4. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Balancing of all the interests involved – Decision on State aid (Arts 88(2) EC and 242 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2); Council Regulation No 659/1999, Art. 7) (see paras 61-62)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the operation of Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2008) 2223 final of 4 June 2008 on the State aid awarded by the Republic of Hungary through power purchase agreements.

Operative part

1. The application for interim relief is dismissed.
Order of the President of the of the Court of First Instance of 30 June 2009 – Tudapetrol Mineralölerzeugnisse Nils Hansen v Commission

(Case T-550/08 R)

Application for interim measures – Commission decision imposing a fine – Application for suspension of operation of the measure and interim relief (repayment of the fine already paid and waiver of a bank guarantee) – No prima facie case and no urgency

1. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Interim measures – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Urgency – Serious and irreparable damage – Cumulative nature – Balancing of all the interests involved – Order of examination and method of verification – Discretion of the judge dealing with the application for interim relief (Arts 225(1) EC, 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2)) (see paras 10-13)

2. Application for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Suspension of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not requiring immediate payment of a fine – Conditions for granting – Serious and irreparable damage (Art. 242 EC) (see paras 40-45)

Re:

APPLICATION for suspension of the operation of Commission Decision C(2008) 5476 final of 1 October 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement in Case COMP/39181 – Candle waxes, in so far as it imposes a fine on the applicant, application to release the applicant from the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for release from the obligation of payment, and other applications for interim measures.

Operative part

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
Order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 May 2011 – Power‑One Italy v Commission

(Case T-489/08)

Action for compensation – Project cofunded by the financial instrument LIFE + – Development of a new system of supplying power for use in mobile telephony (Pneuma project) – Abuse of process – Disregard of formal requirements – Inadmissibility

1. Actions for damages – Independent of actions for annulment – Action partially seeking the withdrawal of an individual decision become definitive – Partial inadmissibility (Arts 235 EC and 288, second para., EC) (see paras 42-50)

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 seeking compensation for loss caused by an EU institution – No indications as to the nature and extent of the loss and the causal link – Manifest inadmissibility (Arts 235 EC and 288, second para., EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21 and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 44(1)(c)) (see paras 52, 54-57, 61-62)

Re:

ACTION for compensation for loss allegedly suffered by the applicant following the Commission’s decision to end the Pneuma project (LIFE04 ENV/IT/000595), intended to cofund development of a new system of supplying power for use in mobile telephony.

Operative part

1. The action is dismissed.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Application for interim measures

–

Suspension of operation of a measure

–

Interim measures

–

Conditions for granting

–

Urgency

–

Serious and irreparable damage

–

Financial loss

–

Loss of opportunity arising from the exclusion of a tenderer from a tendering procedure (Arts 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 104(2) (see paras 25-35

)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION for interim measures seeking, in essence, first, an order suspending the operation of the decision by which the Publications Office of the European Union awarded the contract referred to in Invitation to Tender No 10234 ‘Daily transport and delivery of the Official Journal, books, other periodicals and publications’ to Entreprise des postes et télécommunications Luxembourg, second, an order prohibiting the signature of the contract referred to in the Invitation to Tender and, third, if the contract has already been signed, that its performance be suspended until the Court has ruled on the substance of the action.

Operative part

Operative part

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.

2. Costs are reserved.