ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/36

Judgment of the General Court of 17 November 2016 — Fedtke v EESC

(Case T-157/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Purely confirmatory act - New substantive facts - Burden of proof))

(2017/C 006/45)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Ingrid Fedtke (Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium) (represented by: M.-A. Lucas, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (represented by: M. Pascua Mateo, K. Gambino, X. Chamodraka, A. Carvajal and L. Camarena Januzec, acting as Agents, and B. Wagenbäur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal lodged against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 5 February 2016, Fedtke v EESC (F-107/15, EU:2016:F:15), seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 5 February 2016, Fedtke v EESC (F-107/15);

2. Refers the action to a Chamber of the General Court other than that which has ruled in the present appeal;

3. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/20

Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2017 — Marsh v EUIPO (ClaimsExcellence)

(Case T-308/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark ClaimsExcellence - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 129/32)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Marsh GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: W. Riegger, lawyer)

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

Objet

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 April 2016 (Case R 2358/2015-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign ClaimsExcellence as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Marsh GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 287, 8.8.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 70/19

Judgment of the General Court of 24 January 2017 — Solenis Technologies v EUIPO (STRONG BONDS. TRUSTED SOLUTIONS.)

(Case T-96/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark STRONG BONDS. TRUSTED SOLUTIONS. - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 070/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Solenis Technologies LP (Wilmington, United States) (represented by: A. Sanz Cerralbo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer and A. Kusturovic, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 December 2015 (Case R 613/2015-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign STRONG BONDS. TRUSTED SOLUTIONS. as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Solenis Technologies LP to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 156, 2.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 178/14

Judgment of the General Court of 24 April 2017 — HF v Parliament

(Case T-570/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Member of the auxiliary contract staff - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Psychological harassment - Article 90(1) of the Staff Regulations - Statutory reply period of four months - AECC decision to open an administrative inquiry - No position adopted by the AECC within the statutory reply period as to the reality of the alleged psychological harassment - Concept of decision impliedly rejecting the request for assistance - Non-existent act - Inadmissibility))

(2017/C 178/16)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: HF (represented by: A. Tymen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Ecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU seeking, firstly, the annulment of an implied decision of the Parliament’s Authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment, allegedly made on 11 April 2015, rejecting the request for assistance made by the applicant on 11 December 2014 and, secondly, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Ms HF;

3. Orders Ms HF to bear half of her own costs.

(1) OJ C 27, 25.1.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-142/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 151/36

Judgment of the General Court of 3 April 2017 — Cop v EUIPO — Conexa (AMPHIBIAN)

(Case T-215/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark AMPHIBIAN - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - Lack of descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 151/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Cop Vertriebs-GmbH (Aresing, Germany) (represented by: H. Hofmann, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Conexa LLC (Dover, Delaware, United States) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 March 2016 (Case R 1984/2015-4) relating to invalidity proceedings between Cop and Conexa.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Cop Vertriebs-GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/25

Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2017 — PG v Frontex

(Case T-583/16)

((Civil service - Temporary staff - Non-renewal of a fixed-term contract - Renewal procedure - Article 266 TFEU - Duty of care - Non-contractual liability))

(2017/C 221/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: PG (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) (represented by: H. Caniard and S. Drew, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

ACTION based on Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the decision of 9 June 2015, taken by the authority in Frontex empowered to conclude contracts of employment, not to renew the applicant’s contract and, second, compensation for the harm allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 195/26

Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2017 — OU v Commission

(Case T-569/16) (1)

((Civil service - Contract staff - Disciplinary proceedings - Suspension - Sums withheld from remuneration - Reprimand - Repayment - Article 24(4) of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations))

(2017/C 195/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: OU (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Commission of 13 March 2015 rejecting the applicant’s claim for repayment of the sums withheld from his remuneration during a period of six months as from 15 January 2007, and, second, repayment of those sums together with interest payable on them.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of 13 March 2015 by which the European Commission rejected the application of Mr OU for repayment of the sums withheld from his remuneration pursuant to the decision of the Commission of 14 December 2006;

2. Orders the Commission to repay to Mr OU the sums withheld from his remuneration pursuant to the decision of 14 December 2006;

3. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 13.6.2016 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-141/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/26

Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Jiménez Gasalla v EUIPO (B2B SOLUTIONS)

(Case T-685/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark B2B SOLUTIONS - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 256/30)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Carlos Javier Jiménez Gasalla (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Estella Garbayo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2016 (case R 244/2016-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign B2B SOLUTIONS as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Carlos Javier Jiménez Gasalla to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 249/27

Judgment of the General Court of 15 June 2017 — Bay v Parliament

(Case T-302/16) (1)

((Law governing the Institutions - Decision of the President of the Parliament imposing on a Member of the European Parliament the penalty of forfeiture of entitlement to the subsistence allowance - Article 166 of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament - Right of access to the file - Error of fact))

(2017/C 249/40)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Nicolas Bay (La Celle-Saint-Cloud, France) (represented by: A. Cuignache, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Görlitz, S. Alonso de León and S. Seyr, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of the decision of the President of the Parliament of 9 March 2016 and of the decision of the Bureau of the Parliament of 11 April 2016 imposing on the applicant the penalty of forfeiture of entitlement to the subsistence allowance for a period of five days.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Nicolas Bay to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 1.8.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 283/39

Judgment of the General Court of 20 July 2017 — Barnett and Mogensen v Commission

(Case T-148/16) (1)

((Appeal - Cross-appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Pensions - Adaptation of the weightings - Interim update - Adversely affecting act - Admissibility of the cross-appeal - Article 65(4) of the Staff Regulations - Update for 2014 - Sensitivity threshold concerning the progression of the cost of living))

(2017/C 283/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Adrian Barnett (Roskilde, Denmark) and Sven-Ole Mogensen (Hellerup, Denmark) (represented by: S. Orlandi and T. Martin, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 5 February 2016, Barnett and Mogensen v Commission (F-56/15, EU:F:2016:11) seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal and the cross-appeal;

2. Orders Messrs Adrian Barnett and Sven-Ole Mogensen to bear their own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission in the appeal;

3. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and pay the costs incurred by Messrs Barnett and Mogensen in the cross-appeal.

(1) OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 277/37

Judgment of the General Court of 5 July 2017 — Allstate Insurance v EUIPO (DRIVEWISE)

(Case T-3/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for registration of the EU word mark DRIVEWISE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 277/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Allstate Insurance Company (Northfield, Illinois, United States) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and N. Martzivanou, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 October 2015 (Case R 956/2015-2), relating to an application for registration of the word sign DRIVEWISE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Allstate Insurance Company to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 357/12

Judgment of the General Court of 12 September 2017 — Siragusa v Council

(Case T-678/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Leaving the service - Request to retire - Amendment of the Staff Regulations after that request had been made - Withdrawal of an earlier decision - Legal classification of the contested decision))

(2017/C 357/15)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Sergio Siragusa (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Veiga, acting as Agents) and European Parliament (represented by: M. Dean and D. Nessaf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 July 2016, Siragusa v Council (F-124/15, EU:F:2016:147), seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 13 July 2016, Siragusa v Council (F-124/15);

2. Refers the case to a chamber of the General Court other than that which has ruled on the present appeal;

3. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.
1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 May 2016 (Case R 1206/2015-5) in so far as it refused registration of the word sign Windfinder for the goods and services at issue, with the exception of anemometers in Class 9 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, and of meteorological information, meteorological forecast, meteorological information services and the supply of meteorological information in Class 42 of the Nice Agreement;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 374/33

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2017 — Arrigoni v EUIPO — Arrigoni Battista (Arrigoni Valtaleggio)

(Case T-454/16) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Arrigoni Valtaleggio - Earlier national figurative mark ARRIGONI - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 374/49)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Arrigoni SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: P. Di Gravio, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Arrigoni Battista ApA (Bergamo, Italy) (represented by: S. Verea, M. Balestriero and K. Muraro, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 May 2016 (Case R 2922/2014 1), relating to proceedings for a declaration of invalidity between Arrigoni and Arrigoni Formaggi SpA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Arrigoni SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 369/18

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2017 — Skareby v EEAS

(Case T-585/16) (1)

((Civil service - Officials - Freedom of expression - Duty of loyalty - Serious prejudice to the legitimate interests of the Union - Refusal of permission to publish an article - Request that the text be amended - Article 17a of the Staff Regulations - Subject matter of the action - Decision rejecting the administrative complaint))

(2017/C 369/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Carina Skareby (Louvain, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt, acting as Agent, and by M. Troncoso Ferrer, F.-M. Hislaire and S. Moya Izquierdo, lawyers)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU seeking (i) annulment of the decision of 5 June 2015 of the EEAS refusing permission to publish an article and requesting that changes be made to two paragraphs of the proposed text, and (ii) ‘so far as necessary’, annulment of the decision of 18 December 2015 of the EEAS rejecting the complaint brought against the original decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Carina Skareby to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 191, 30.5.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-15/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/24

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — NRJ Group v EUIPO — Sky International (SKY ENERGY)

(Case T-184/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark SKY ENERGY - Earlier EU word mark NRJ - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2017/C 402/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: NRJ Group (Boileau, France) (represented by: M. Antoine-Lalance, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Sky International AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Barry, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 February 2016 (Case R 3137/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between NRJ Group and Sky International.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders NRJ Group to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 382/43

Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2017 — Knöll v Europol

(Case T-563/16) (1)

((Civil Service - Europol - Non-renewal of a contract - Refusal to award a contract for an indefinite period - Compensation - Annulment by the Civil Service Tribunal - Enforcement of the judgments in Cases F 44/09 and F 105/12))

(2017/C 382/52)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Brigitte Knöll (Hochheim am Main, Germany) (represented by: W. Dammingh and N. Dane, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (represented by: D. Neumann and C. Falmagne, acting as Agents, and D. Waelbroeck, A. Duron and I.Antypas, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought under Article 270 TFEU, seeking annulment of the decision of Europol of 29 July 2014 not to renew for an indefinite period the contract awarded to the applicant and to allocate a sum of EUR 10 000 to her on account of the length of the procedure and the prolongation of her state of uncertainty and annulment of the decision rejecting his complaint.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mrs Brigitte Knöll to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 354, 26.10.2015 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case No F-120/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1 September 2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 424/35

Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach v EUIPO (Shape of a large glass)

(Case T-857/16) (1)

((European Union trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Three-dimensional mark - Shape of a large glass - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive nature - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 2017/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2017/C 424/50)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach GmbH & Co. KG (Erding, Germany) (represented by: A. Hayn, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 September 2016 (Case R 659/2016-2) concerning the international registration designating the European Union of the three-dimensional mark constituted by the shape of a large glass.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Erdinger Weißbräu Werner Brombach GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Case T-683/16: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2017 — Kuka Systems v EUIPO (MATRIX BODY SHOP) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark MATRIX BODY SHOP — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2017 — Kuka Systems v EUIPO (MATRIX BODY SHOP)

(Case T-683/16) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark MATRIX BODY SHOP — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Kuka Systems GmbH (Augsburg, Germany) (represented by: B. Maneth and C. Huch-Hallwachs, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 July 2016 (Case R 2503/2015-4), relating to an application for registration of the word sign MATRIX BODY SHOP as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kuka Systems GmbH to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 5/39

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2017 — Mapei v EUIPO — Steenfabrieken Vandersanden (RE-CONzerø)

(Case T-723/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark RE-CONzerø - Earlier EU word mark ZERO - 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) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 005/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mapei SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: initially, F. Caricato and, subsequently, M. Fazzini, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Steenfabrieken Vandersanden NV (Bilzen, Belgium) (represented by: J. Muyldermans and P. Maeyaert, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 July 2016 (Case R 2374/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Steenfabrieken Vandersanden and Mapei.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mapei SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 462, 12.12.2016.