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

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — 12seasons v EUIPO — Société immobilière et mobilière de Montagny (BE EDGY BERLIN)

(Case T-329/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark BE EDGY BERLIN - Earlier national word mark EDJI - 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 72/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: 12seasons GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: M. Gail, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Société immobilière et mobilière de Montagny (Roanne, France) (represented by: A. Grolée, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 March 2019 (Case R 1522/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Société immobilière et mobilière de Montagny and 12seasons.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders 12seasons GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Azarov v Council

(Case T-286/19) (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 covered by 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 was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2021/C 53/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: G. Lansky and A. Egger, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J. Van Blaaderen and P. Mahnič, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the 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 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 the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of 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 the name of Mr. Mykola Yanovych Azarov was 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 213, 24.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 February 2021 — Spadafora v Commission

(Case T-130/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Vacancy notice - Post of head of unit - Rejection of application - Middle managers - Principle of impartiality - Responsibility)

(2021/C 110/29)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Sergio Spadafora (represented by: G. Belotti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and T. Bohr, acting as Agents, and by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: CC (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) of 18 May 2018 appointing CC as head of the [confidential] unit of the [confidential] Directorate and, second, an order that the Commission pay compensation in respect of the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Sergio Spadafora to bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission and CC.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Ramazani Shadary v Council

(Case T-122/19) (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 98/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary (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 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 Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2021 — Crédit Lyonnais v ECB

(Case T-504/19) (1)

(Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Article 4(1)(d) and Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Calculation of the leverage ratio - ECB’s partial refusal to authorise the exclusion of exposures meeting certain conditions - Article 429(14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Failure to examine all the relevant aspects of the individual case - Res judicata - Article 266 TFEU)

(2021/C 228/38)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Crédit Lyonnais (Lyon, France) (represented by: A. Champsaur and A. Delors, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: J. Poscia, R. Ugena and F. Bonnard, acting as Agents, and H.-G. Kamann, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRCAG-39 adopted by the ECB on 3 May 2019, pursuant to Article 4(1)(d) and Article 10 of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the ECB concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ 2013 L 287, p. 63), and Article 429(14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1, corrigenda OJ 2013 L 208, p. 68, and OJ 2013 L 321, p. 6), in so far as it refuses to authorise the applicant to exclude certain exposures from the calculation of the leverage ratio.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRCAG-39 adopted by the ECB on 3 May 2019 in so far as it refused to authorise Crédit Lyonnais to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio 34 % of its exposures to the Caisse des dépôts et consignations;

2. Orders the ECB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 17 March 2021 — EJ v EIB

(Case T-585/19) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Remuneration - Travel costs - Double dependent child allowance - Child with serious illness - Capping of the backdated reimbursement of those costs and of that double allowance - Reasonable period - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Action for annulment and for damages)

(2021/C 182/69)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: EJ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: J. Klein, M. Loizou and T. Gilliams, acting as Agents, and by J. Currall and B. Wägenbaur, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and on Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, annulment of the decision of 16 February 2018 capping the backdated reimbursement of the recurring travel costs incurred by the applicant owing to her child’s serious illness at 18 months and of the decision of 23 March 2018 capping the backdated award of the double dependent child allowance at five years and, secondly, compensation for the material and pecuniary harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2021 — Puma v EUIPO — Gemma Group (Representation of a bounding feline)

(Case T-510/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark representing a bounding feline - Earlier international figurative marks representing a bounding feline - Relative ground for refusal - No injury to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 263/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Gemma Group Srl (Cerasolo Ausa, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 April 2019 (Case R 2057/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Puma and Gemma Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Puma SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2021 — Romania v Commission

(Case T-543/19) (1)

(Cohesion Fund and ERDF - Article 139(6) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 - Temporal application of an increased co-financing rate adopted after submission of the final application for interim payment but before acceptance of the accounts - Legitimate expectation - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of good administration)

(2021/C 242/36)

Language of the case: Romanian

Parties

Applicant: Romania (represented by: E. Gane, A. Rotăreanu and M. Chicu, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Armenia, S. Pardo Quintillán and L. Mantl, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2019) 4027 final of 23 May 2019 so far as concerns the acceptance of the accounts and the calculation of the amount chargeable to the Cohesion Fund and to the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for the accounting year 2017-2018 and for ‘Large Infrastructure’ Operational Programme CCI 2014RO16M1OP001, in applying a co-financing rate for Priority Axes 1 and 2 of that operational programme of 75 % and not 85 %.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Romania to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 337, 7.10.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — RA v Court of Auditors

(Case T-867/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2016 promotion exercise - Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AD 11 - Absence of staff report - Comparison of merits - Compliance with a judgment of the General Court - Adoption of a new decision not to promote - Obligation to state reasons - Article 45 of the Staff Regulations - Manifest error of assessment)

(2021/C 310/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: RA (represented by: S. Orlandi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Court of Auditors (represented by: C. Lesauvage and A.-M. Feipel Cosciug, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of 27 February 2019 by which the Court of Auditors decided not to promote the applicant to Grade AD 11 and, second, compensation for the damage which the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders RA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 — FJ and Others v EEAS

(Case T-698/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Remuneration - EEAS staff posted to a third country - Update of the correction coefficients - Manifest error of assessment - Retroactive effect - Legal certainty - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials)

(2021/C 297/45)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: FJ and the 8 other applicants whose names appear in the annex to the judgment (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and R. Spáč, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision drawing up the applicants’ salary slip for December 2018 to the extent that it applied, for the first time, new correction coefficients applicable to their remuneration, with retroactive effect from 1 February 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders FJ and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 406, 2.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — BG v Parliament

(Case T-253/19) (1)

(Civil service - Accredited parliamentary assistants - Termination of the contract - Breakdown in the relationship of trust - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Psychological harassment - Request for assistance - Retaliation - Manifest errors of assessment - Liability)

(2021/C 357/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BG (represented by: L. Levi, A. Champetier and A. Tymen, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for, first, annulment of the Parliament’s decision of 18 May 2018 to terminate the applicant’s contract as an accredited parliamentary assistant and, secondly, compensation for the non-material damage which she claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BG to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Welter’s v EUIPO (Shape of a handgrip with a brush)

(Case T-624/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a handgrip with a brush - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 329/23)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Welter’s Co. Ltd (Douliu, Taiwan) (represented by: T. Meinke, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2019 (Case R 2428/2018-5) concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a handgrip with a brush as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Welter’s Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2021 — Parliament v Axa Assurances Luxembourg and Others

(Case T-384/19) (1)

(Arbitration clause - ‘Construction all-risk’ insurance contract - Extension and renovation of the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg - Damage caused by rainwater - Claim for reimbursement of costs and for payment of the indemnity - Scope of the insurance - Exclusion clause - Ancillary procedural obligations - Procedure by default in part)

(2021/C 471/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Paladini and B. Schäfer, acting as Agents, and by C. Point and P. Hédouin, lawyers)

Defendants: Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA (Luxembourg), La Luxembourgeoise SA (Luxembourg) (represented by: C. Collarini and S. Denu, lawyers), Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij NV

Re:

Application under Article 272 TFEU seeking an order that the defendants reimburse the costs related to the water damage caused to the Konrad Adenauer building in Luxembourg following heavy rainfall on the site on 27 and 30 May 2016.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Orders Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij NV to reimburse the sum of EUR 79 653,89 to the European Parliament together with statutory interest for late payment relating thereto as from 22 December 2017, the rate of which is the sum of the interest rate applied by the European Central Bank (ECB) to its main refinancing operations and eight percentage points;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Nationale-Nederlanden Schadeverzekering Maatschappij to bear the costs of the default procedure concerning it;

4. Orders the Parliament, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay two thirds of the costs incurred by Axa Assurances Luxembourg SA, Bâloise Assurances Luxembourg SA and La Luxembourgeoise SA.

(1) OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — AH v Eurofound

(Case T-630/19) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the contract staff - Psychological harassment - Request for assistance - Action for annulment - Lis pendens - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Rule of correspondence between the application and the complaint - Obligation to state reasons - Lack of competence of the author of an act - Error of assessment - Liability - Non-material damage)

(2021/C 431/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: AH (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (represented by: F. van Boven and M. Jepsen, acting as Agents, and by C. Callanan, Solicitor)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of Eurofound of 9 November 2018 closing the administrative investigation AI-2018/01 opened following the applicant’s request for assistance in respect of alleged psychological harassment on the part of his superiors, and second, compensation for the non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders AH to pay, in addition to his own costs, those incurred by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound).

(1) OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 1 December 2021 — HC v Commission

(Case T-804/19) (1)

(Civil service - Recruitment - Notice of competition - Open competition EPSO/AD/363/18 - Decision not to admit the applicant to the next stage of the competition - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Plea of illegality - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Right to be heard - Principle of sound administration - Language rules for the competition - Discrimination based on language - Liability)

(2022/C 51/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: HC (represented by: G. Pandey, V. Villante and D. Rovetta, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Brauhoff, T. Lilamand and D. Milanowska, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU for the annulment of, first, the notice of competition EPSO/AD/363/18 of 11 October 2018 organised for the purpose of drawing up two reserve lists from which the Commission is to recruit administrators (at grade AD 7) in the fields of customs and taxation, secondly, the decision of the selection board for that competition not to include the applicant’s name on the list of individuals invited to the assessment centre, thirdly, the decision of that selection board rejecting the applicant’s request for a review, fourthly, the Commission’s decision of 20 August 2019 dismissing the applicant’s claim under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and, fifthly, the list of candidates invited to the next stage of the competition, and for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result thereof.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders HC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2021 — Novolipetsk Steel v Commission

(Case T-790/19) (1)

(Measures that the European Union may take in relation to the combined effect of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures with safeguard measures - Importation of cold-rolled flat steel products and hot-rolled flat products of iron, non-alloy or other alloy steel - Modification of regulations imposing anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures on products subject to safeguard measures - Principle of non-discrimination - Manifest error of assessment)

(2021/C 502/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Novolipetsk Steel PAO (Lipetsk, Russia) (represented by: E. Gergondet and P. Vander Schueren, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1382 of 2 September 2019 amending certain Regulations imposing anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures on certain steel products subject to safeguard measures (OJ 2019 L 227, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Novolipetsk Steel PAO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.