ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Huevos Herrera Mejías v EUIPO — Montesierra (MontiSierra HUEVOS CON SABOR A CAMPO)

(Case T-737/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark MontiSierra HUEVOS CON SABOR A CAMPO - Earlier EU and national word marks MONTESIERRA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity between goods - Similarity between signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2020/C 390/51)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Huevos Herrera Mejías, SL (Torre Alháquime, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Montesierra, SA (Jerez de la Frontera, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 September 2019 (Case R 2021/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Montesierra and Huevos Herrera Mejías.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Huevos Herrera Mejías, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — Casual Dreams v EUIPO — López Fernández (Dayaday)

(Case T-50/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Dayaday - Earlier national figurative marks DAYADAY and dayaday - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Reputation - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark)

(2020/C 378/34)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Casual Dreams, SLU (Manresa, Spain) (represented by: A. B. Padial Martínez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O'Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Miguel Ángel López Fernández (Fuensalida, Spain)

Re

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 November 2018 (Case R 2097/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Casual Dreams and Mr López Fernández.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 November 2018 (Case R 2097/2018-5) in so far as it concerns the following goods: — ‘Polarizing spectacles’, ‘Snow goggles’, ‘Cyclists’ glasses’, ‘Goggles for sports’, ‘Swim goggles’, in Class 9; — ‘Wash cloths’, ‘Textile goods and substitutes for textile goods’, ‘Fabrics’, ‘Textiles, not included in other classes’, in Class 24;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the parties each to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Arbuzov v Council

(Case T-289/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State respected the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2020/C 414/56)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Sergej Arbuzov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: R. Pekař and P. Mahnič, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 7) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 1), in so far as those acts maintain the applicant’s name on the list of the persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as Sergej Arbuzov’s name has been maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Vincenti v EUIPO

(Case T-174/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - Promotion exercises 2014 to 2017 - Decision not to promote the applicant to the AST 8 grade - Right to be heard)

(2020/C 399/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Guillaume Vincenti (Alicante, Spain) (represented by H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by A. Lukošiūtė and K. Tóth, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decision of EUIPO of 6 June 2018 not to promote the applicant to the AST 8 grade in the 2014 to 2017 promotion exercises.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 June 2018 not to promote Mr Guillaume Vincenti to the AST 8 grade in the 2014 to 2017 promotion exercises;

2. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 November 2020 — Totalizator Sportowy v EUIPO — Lottoland Holdings (Lottoland)

(Case T-820/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Lottoland - Earlier national figurative marks LOTTO and Lotto - Earlier national word mark lotto - Declaration of partial invalidity - Relative ground for refusal - No damage to reputation - No link between the marks at issue - Article 8(5) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 9/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Totalizator Sportowy sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: B. Matusiewicz-Kulig, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Lottoland Holdings Ltd (Ocean Village, Gibraltar) (represented by: A. Gérard, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 October 2019 (Case R 97/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Totalizator Sportowy and Lottoland Holdings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Totalizator Sportowy sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2020 — smart things solutions v EUIPO — Samsung Electronics (smart:)things)

(Case T-48/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark smart:)things - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 433/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: smart things solutions GmbH (Seefeld, Germany) (represented by: R. Dissmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Söder, H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Samsung Electronics GmbH (Schwalbach/Taunus, Germany) (represented by: T. Schmitz, M. Breuer and I. Dimitrov, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 November 2018 (Case R 835/2018-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Samsung Electronics and smart things solutions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders smart things solutions GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Samsung Electronics GmbH.

(1) OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2020 –Bronckers v Commission

(Case T-166/19) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Agreement between the European Community and the United Mexican States on the mutual recognition and protection of designations for spirit drinks - Documents submitted within the framework of the Joint Committee - Refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of the public interest in respect of international relations - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party)

(2021/C 28/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Marco Bronckers (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. Kreijger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 150 final of 10 January 2019, rejecting the confirmatory application for access to the documents ‘Tequila cases found by the Tequila Regulatory Council to be informed to the European Commission (Ares(2018 4023479)’ and ‘Verification Reports in the European Market (Reportes de Verificación en el Mercado Europeo) (Ares(2018) 4023509)’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Marco Bronckers to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 December 2020 — Kalai v Council

(Case T-178/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment - Proportionality - Right to property)

(2021/C 28/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Nader Kalai (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada) (represented by: G. Karouni, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and P. Plaza García, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2019/87 of 21 January 2019 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2019 L 18 I, p. 13), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/85 of 21 January 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2019 L 18 I, p. 4), Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/806 of 17 May 2019 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2019 L 132, p. 36), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/798 of 17 May 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2019 L 132, p. 1), Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/719 of 28 May 2020 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 66), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/716 of 28 May 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 1), in so far as those acts concern the applicant, and, second, application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant on account of those acts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Nader Kalai to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Haswani v Council

(Case T-521/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Syria - Freezing of funds - Res judicata - Period allowed for commencing proceedings - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment - Proportionality)

(2021/C 62/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: George Haswani (Yabrud, Syria) (represented by: G. Karouni, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Limonet and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 125), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/840 of 27 May 2016 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 30), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 62), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/907 of 29 May 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 15), of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2017/1245 of 10 July 2017 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 178, p. 13), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1241 of 10 July 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2017 L 178, p. 1), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/778 of 28 May 2018 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2018 L 131, p. 16), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/774 of 28 May 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2018 L 131, p. 1), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/806 of 17 May 2019 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2019 L 132, p. 36), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/798 of 17 May 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2019 L 132, p. 1), of Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/719 of 28 May 2020 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 66), and of Council Regulation (EU) 2020/716 of 28 May 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2020 L 168, p. 1) in so far as those measures apply to the applicant and, moreover, application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage that that applicant allegedly suffered as a result of those acts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr. George Haswani to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 305, 9.9.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Alkemie Group v EUIPO — Mann & Schröder (ALKEMIE)

(Case T-860/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ALKEMIE - Earlier EU word mark Alkmene - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 53/50)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Alkemie Group sp. z o.o. (Gdynia, Poland) (represented by: A. Korbela, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mann & Schröder GmbH (Siegelsbach, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2019 (Case R 2231/2018-2) regarding opposition proceedings between Mann & Schröder and Alkemie Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 September 2019 (Case R 2231/2018-2) to the extent that it dismissed Alkemie Group sp. z o.o’s action in respect of ‘dietary aids’ in Class 5;

2. Dismisses the action for the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Kampete v Council

(Case T-113/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - 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 98/21)

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: J.-P. Hix, H. Marcos Fraile, S. Van Overmeire and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 134, p. 47) and, second, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018 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 2018 L 314, 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 139, 15.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Palírna U Zeleného stromu v EUIPO — Bacardi (BLEND 42 VODKA)

(Case T-829/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark BLEND 42 VODKA - Earlier EU word mark and international figurative mark 42 BELOW - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Relevant public - Similarity of the goods and services - Similarity of the signs - Global assessment of the likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 88/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Palírna U Zeleného stromu a.s. (Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic) (represented by: T. Chleboun, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bacardi & Co. Ltd (Meyrin, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Parassina, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2019 (Case R 2531/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Bacardi & Co. and Palírna U Zeléného stromu.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Palírna U Zeleného stromu a.s. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2021 — BK v EASO

(Case T-277/19) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary agents - Temporary reassignment - Action for annulment - Purely confirmatory measure - Inadmissibility - Explicit decision rejecting the complaint - Autonomous scope - Suspension of the effects of the decision subject to the complaint - Interest in bringing proceedings - Action for damages - Close link to the claim for annulment - No pre-litigation procedure - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 217/48)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: BK (represented by: V. Christianos, A. Skoulikis and D. Karagkounis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Asylum Support Office (represented by: P. Eyckmans and A. Stamatopoulou, acting as Agents, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of EASO of 20 September 2018 to assign the applicant to Malta from 1 November 2018, of the implied decision rejecting the complaint directed against that decision and of the decision of EASO of 6 June 2019 explicitly rejecting that complaint and, second, compensation for the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant following that latter decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BK to bear half of her own costs;

3. Orders the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by BK.

(1) OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2021 — Sophia Group v Parliament

(Case T-578/19) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Provision of assistance services for buildings - Rejection of a tenderer’s offer - Award of the contract to another tenderer - Selection criteria - Award criteria - Most economically advantageous tender - Use of labels and certifications in the formulation of award criteria - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 128/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Sophia Group (Saint-Josse-ten-Noode, Belgium) (represented by: Y. Schneider and C.-H. de la Vallée Poussin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Tapper Brandberg and B. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 30 July 2019 to award Lot No 1 of the tender for the ‘Provision of Buildings HelpDesk services’ (Call for tenders 06A 0010/2019/M011) to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sophia Group to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.