ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 100/37

Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Freistaat Sachsen and Others v Commission

(Joined Cases T-102/07 and T-120/07) (1)

(State aid - Aid granted by Germany in the form of a participation and loan guarantees - Decision declaring aid incompatible with the common market - General aid scheme approved by the Commission - Concept of a firm in difficulty - Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty - Amount of aid - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)

2010/C 100/57

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Freistaat Sachsen (Germany) (represented by: C. von Donat and G. Quardt, lawyers) (Case T-102/07), MB Immobilien Verwaltungs GmbH (Neukirch, Germany) (represented initially by: G. Brüggen, and subsequently by A. Seidl, K. Lengert and W. Sommer, lawyers) and MB System GmbH & Co. KG, (Nordhausen, Germany) (represented by: G. Brüggen, lawyer) (Case T-120/07)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Gross and T. Scharf, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/492/EC of 24 January 2007 on the State aid C 38/2005 (ex NN 52/2004) implemented by Germany for the Biria Group (OJ 2007 L 183, p. 27)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision 2007/492/EC of 24 January 2007 on the State aid C 38/2005 (ex NN 52/2004) implemented by Germany for the Biria Group.

2. Orders the Commission to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings in Case T-120/07.

(1) OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 37/33

Judgment of the General Court of 10 December 2009 — Cofac v Commission

(Case T-158/07) (1)

(ESF - Reduction in financial assistance - Training schemes - Rights of the defence - Right to be heard)

2010/C 37/42

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Cofac — Cooperativa de Formação e Animação Cultural, CRL (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: L. Gomes, J. Ortigão and C. Peixoto, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Commission Decision D(2005) 13066 of 3 June 2005 reducing the amount of the financial assistance granted to the applicant by the European Social Fund (ESF) by Decision No C(88) 0831 of 29 April 1988 for training schemes (file No 880707 P1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Cofac — Cooperativa de Formação e Animação Cultural, CRL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 7.7.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/25

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 — Procter & Gamble v OHIM — Prestige Cosmetics (P&G PRESTIGE BEAUTE)

(Case T-366/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark P&G PRESTIGE BEAUTE - Earlier national figurative marks Prestige - Partial refusal to register - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2010/C 301/39

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Procter & Gamble Company (Cincinnati, Ohio, United States) (represented by: K. Sandberg and B. Klingberg, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Laporta Insa, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Prestige Cosmetics SpA (Anzola Emilia, Italy) (represented by: A. Mugnoz, M. Andreolini and A. Parini, lawyers)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 July 2007 (Case R 681/2006-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Prestige Cosmetics Srl and The Procter & Gamble Company

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 19 July 2007 (Case R 681/2006-2);

2. Orders OHIM to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by The Procter & Gamble Company in the proceedings before the Court;

3. Orders Prestige Cosmetics SpA to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by The Procter & Gamble Company in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal;

4. Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

(1) OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 209/33

Judgment of the General Court of 17 June 2010 — CEVA v Commission

(Joined Cases T-428/07 and T-455/07) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Contracts entered into under a specific research, technological development and demonstration programme in the field of ‘Quality of life and management of living resources (1998-2002)’ - Seahealth and Biopal projects - Debit notes - Applications for annulment - Reclassification of the actions - Admissibility - Rule that the parties should be heard and rights of the defence - Recovery of all the financial contributions paid by the European Union - Serious financial irregularities)

2010/C 209/47

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Centre d'étude et de valorisation des algues SA (CEVA) (Pleubian, France) (represented by: J.-M. Peyrical, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially by L. Escobar Guerrero and W. Roels, then by W. Roels, acting as Agents, and E. Bouttier, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment, in Case T-428/07, of debit note No 3240908670 of 20 September 2007, relating to the Seahealth project and, in Case T-455/07, of debit note No 3240909271 of 4 October 2007, relating to the Biopal contract, and that the Commission be ordered to reimburse those debit notes in favour of CEVA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders each party to bear half of its own costs and half of the costs incurred by the other party.

(1) OJ C 22, 26.1.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 160/15

Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Far Eastern New Century v Council

(Case T-167/07) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating in Taiwan - Determination of the dumping margin - Asymmetrical method of calculation - Export pricing pattern differing according to purchasers and time periods - Full degree of dumping margin cannot be reflected by symmetrical methods of calculation - Duty to state reasons)

2011/C 160/17

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Far Eastern New Century Corp., formerly Far Eastern Textile Ltd (Taipei, Taiwan) (represented by: P. De Baere, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, Agents, and by G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, H. van Vliet and K. Talabér-Ritz and, subsequently, H. van Vliet and M. França, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 of 22 February 2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Taiwan following an expiry review and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(2) and Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ 2007 L 59, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Far Eastern New Century Corp. to bear its own costs, together with those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 103/19

Judgment of the Court of 17 February 2011 — FIFA v Commission

(Case T-385/07) (1)

(Television broadcasting - Article 3a of Directive 89/552/EEC - Measures taken by the Kingdom of Belgium concerning events of major importance for Belgian society - Football World Cup - Decision declaring the measures compatible with Community law - Statement of reasons - Articles 43 EC and 49 EC - Right to property)

2011/C 103/33

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented initially by: R. Denton, E. Batchelor, F. Young, Solicitors, and A. Barav, lawyer, and subsequently by E. Batchelor, A. Barav, D. Reymond, lawyer, and F. Carlin, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Montaguti and N. Yerrell, Agents, assisted by J. Flynn, QC, and L. Maya, Barrister)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: L. Van den Broeck and C. Pochet, Agents, assisted by J. Stuyck, A. Berenboom and A. Joachimowicz, lawyers); Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and J. Möller, Agents); and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Behzadi-Spencer, E. Jenkinson and L. Seeboruth, Agents, assisted initially by T. de la Mare, and subsequently by B. Kennelly, Barristers)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2007/479/EC of 25 June 2007 on the compatibility with Community law of measures taken by Belgium pursuant to Article 3a(1) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ 2007 L 180, p. 24).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 315, 22.12.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 311/35

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2011 — Olive Line International v OHIM — Knopf (O-live)

(Case T-485/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark O-live - Earlier national trade name Olive line - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Right to prohibit use of a subsequent mark - Likelihood of confusion - Article 7 of the Spanish Trade Mark Law and Article 8(1) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))

2011/C 311/62

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Olive Line International, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schäffner and B. Schmidt, agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Reinhard Knopf (Malsch, Germany) (represented by: W. Weber, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 September 2007 (Case R 1478/2006-2) in opposition proceedings between Olive Line International, SL, and Mr Reinhard Knopf.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 26 September 2007 (Case R 1478/2006-2);

2. orders OHIM to pay the costs;

3. orders Mr Reinhard Knopf to bear his own costs.

(1) OJ C 51, 23.2.2008
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 269/41

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2011 — Shell Petroleum and Others v Commission

(Case T-38/07) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in butadiene rubber and emulsion styrene butadiene rubber - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Imputability of the offending conduct - Fines - Gravity of the infringement - Aggravating circumstances)

2011/C 269/89

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Shell Petroleum NV (The Hague, Netherlands); Shell Nederland BV (The Hague); and Shell Nederland Chemie BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented initially by: T. Snoep and J. Brockhoff, and subsequently by T. Snoep and S. Chamalaun, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: M. Kellerbauer, V. Bottka and J. Samnadda, and subsequently by M. Kellerbauer and V. Bottka, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment, so far as Shell Petroleum NV and Shell Nederland BV are concerned, of Commission Decision C(2006) 5700 final of 29 November 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.638 — Butadiene Rubber and Emulsion Styrene Butadiene Rubber) or, in the alternative, annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on Shell Petroleum, Shell Nederland and Shell Nederland Chemie BV.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Shell Petroleum NV, Shell Nederland BV and Shell Nederland Chemie BV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 14.4.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 138/11

Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2012 — Slovakia v Commission

(Case T-247/07) (1)

(Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Measures to be adopted on account of the accession of new Member States - Act of Accession of 2003 - Determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar and financial consequences of their elimination - Objective pursued by a provision of primary law - Decision 2007/361/EC)

2012/C 138/18

Language of the case: Slovak

Parties

Applicant: Slovak Republic (represented initially by J. Čorba and subsequently by B. Ricziová, agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and A. Tokár, agents)

Interveners in support of the Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented: initially by T. Nowakowski, subsequently by M. Dowgielewicz, and finally by M. Szpunar, B. Majczyna and D. Krawczyk, agents) and Republic of Lithuania (represented by: D. Kriaučiūnas and R. Krasuckaitė, agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/361/EC of 4 May 2007 on the determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar and the financial consequences of their elimination in relation to the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (OJ 2007 L 123, p. 14), in so far as it concerns the Slovak Republic.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision 2007/361/EC of 4 May 2007 on the determination of surplus stocks of agricultural products other than sugar and the financial consequences of their elimination in relation to the accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia, in so far as it concerns the Slovak Republic;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay its own costs and the costs incurred by the Slovak Republic.

(1) OJ C 211, 8.9.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/10

Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2011 — Sison v Council

(Case T-341/07) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism - Common Position 2001/931/CFSP and Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 - Actions for annulment - Adaptation of heads of claim - Judicial review - Statement of reasons - Conditions for implementation of a Community measure freezing funds)

2012/C 13/19

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Jose Maria Sison (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Fermon, A. Comte, H. Schultz, D. Gürses and W. Kaleck, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop, E. Finnegan and R. Szostak, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by by C. Wissels, M. de Mol, Y. de Vries, M. Noort, J. Langer and M. Bulterman,, acting as Agents); United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by S. Behzadi Spencer and I. Rao, acting as Agents), and European Commission (represented initially by P. Aalto and S. Boelaert, and subsequently by S. Boelaert and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents)

Re:

Following the judgment of the General Court of 30 September 2009 in Case T-341/07 Sison v Council [2009] ECR II–3625, application for compensation for damage allegedly sustained by the applicant as a result of the restrictive measures taken against him with a view to combating terrorism

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action for compensation;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay, so far as the costs relating to the action for annulment are concerned, the costs incurred by Jose Maria Sison in addition to its own costs;

3. Orders Mr Sison to pay, so far as the costs relating to the action for compensation are concerned, the costs incurred by the Council in addition to his own costs;

4. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Commission to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 336/13

Judgment of the General Court of 16 September 2013 — Galp Energía España and Others v Commission

(Case T-462/07) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Spanish market for penetration bitumen - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Annual market-sharing and price-fixing arrangements - Evidence of participation in the cartel - Calculation of the amount of the fine)

2013/C 336/25

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Galp Energía España, SA (Alcobendas, Spain); Petróleos de Portugal (Petrogal), SA (Lisbon, Portugal); Galp Energia, SGPS, SA (Lisbon) (represented by: M. Slotboom and G. Gentil Anastácio, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, acting as Agent, assisted initially by J. Rivas Andrés, lawyer, and by M. Heenan Bróna, Solicitor, and subsequently by J. Rivas Andrés)

Re:

Application, principally, for annulment in whole or in part of Commission Decision C(2007) 4441 final of 3 October 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/38.710 — Bitumen (Spain)) and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2007) 4441 final of 3 October 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/38.710 — Bitumen Spain) in so far as it finds that Galp Energía España, SA, Petróleos de Portugal (Petrogal), SA, and Galp Energia, SGPS, SA were involved in a complex of agreements and concerted practices in the Spanish market for bitumen, to the extent that that complex includes (i) the system for monitoring the implementation of the market sharing and customer-allocation arrangements and (ii) the compensation mechanism to correct deviations from the market-sharing and customer-allocation arrangements;

2. Annuls Article 3 of Decision C(2007) 4441 final in so far as it requires Galp Energía España, Petróleos de Portugal (Petrogal) and Galp Energia, SGPS to bring to an end the infringement as found in Article 1 of that decision and to refrain from repeating any act or conduct described in that article or having the same or similar object or effect, to the extent that that infringement includes (i) the system for monitoring the implementation of the market-sharing and customer-allocation arrangements and (ii) the compensation mechanism to correct deviations from the market-sharing and customer-allocation arrangements;

3. Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Galp Energía España and on Petróleos de Portugal (Petrogal) in Article 2 of Decision C(2007) 4441 final at EUR 8 277 500, and the amount of the fine imposed on Galp Energia, SGPS in Article 2 of Decision C(2007) 4441 at EUR 6 149 000;

4. Dismisses the remaining heads of claim in the application;

5. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 51, 23.2.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 156/26

Judgment of the General Court of 12 April 2013 — Du Pont de Nemours (France) and Others v Commission

(Case T-31/07) (1)

(Plant protection products - Active substance flusilazole - Inclusion of flusilazole in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC - Actions for annulment - Partial annulment - Non-severability - Inadmissibility - Non-contractual liability - Limiting the inclusion for a period of 18 months and for four crops - Precautionary principle - Principle of proportionality - Right to be heard - Equal treatment - Statement of reasons - Misuse of powers - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)

2013/C 156/43

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Du Pont de Nemours (France) SAS (Puteaux, France); Du Pont Portugal — Serviços, Sociedade Unipessoal Lda (Lisbon, Portugal); Du Pont Ibérica, SL (Barcelona, Spain); Du Pont de Nemours (Belgium) BVBA (Mechelen, Belgium); Du Pont de Nemours Italiana Srl (Milan, Italy); Du Pont De Nemours (Nederland) BV (Dordrecht, Netherlands); Du Pont de Nemours (Deutschland) GmbH (Bad Homburg vor der Höhe, Germany); DuPont CZ s.r.o. (Prague, Czech Republic); DuPont Magyarország Kereskedelmi kft (Budaors, Hungary); DuPont Poland sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland); DuPont Romania Srl (Bucharest, Romania); DuPont (UK) Ltd (Stevenage, United Kingdom); Dy-Pont Agkro Ellas AE (Halandri, Greece); DuPont International Operations SARL (Le Grand Saconnex, Switzerland); DuPont Solutions (France) SAS (Puteaux) (represented: initially by D. Waelbroeck and N. Rampal, and subsequently by D. Waelbroeck, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by L. Parpala and B. Doherty, and subsequently by L. Parpala and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicants: European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented: by U. Zinsmeister and E. Antypas, lawyers)

Re:

Action for (i) annulment of Commission Directive 2006/133/EC of 11 December 2006 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include flusilazole as active substance (OJ 2006 L 349, p. 27) in so far as it includes flusilazole in Annex I to Directive 91/414 in respect of only four crops and for a period of 18 months and (ii) damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Du Pont de Nemours (France) SAS, Du Pont Portugal — Serviços, Sociedade Unipessoal Lda, Du Pont Ibérica, SL, Du Pont de Nemours (Belgium) BVBA, Du Pont de Nemours Italiana Srl, Du Pont De Nemours (Nederland) BV, Du Pont de Nemours (Deutschland) GmbH, DuPont CZ s.r.o., DuPont Magyarország Kereskedelmi kft, DuPont Poland sp. z o.o., DuPont Romania Srl, DuPont (UK) Ltd, Dy-Pont Agkro Ellas AE, DuPont International Operations SARL and DuPont Solutions (France) SAS, to bear their own costs and to pay those of the Commission in respect of the main proceedings and the interlocutory proceedings;

3. Orders the European Crop Protection Association (ECPA) to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.