ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2019 — ZPC Flis v EUIPO — Aldi Einkauf (Happy Moreno choco)

(Case T-498/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Happy Moreno choco - Earlier national figurative marks MORENO - 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) - Substitution of the list of goods covered by the earlier national figurative marks - Rectification of the decision of the Board of Appeal - Article 102(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Legal basis - Previous decision-making practice - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations)

(2019/C 432/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ZPC Flis sp.j. (Radziejowice, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Kompari and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and M. Minkner, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2018 (Case R 1464/2017-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Aldi Einkauf and ZPC Flis.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 31 May 2018 (Case R 1464/2017-1) in so far as it refuses registration of the mark applied for in respect of the following goods: ‘coffee substitutes; tea; cocoa; cocoa products; chocolate-based beverages, all aforementioned goods also as instant form’, with the exception of cocoa as regards the latter;

2. Upholds the opposition in respect of all the goods and services referred to in the application for registration, with the exception of the services in Class 35 corresponding to the following description: ‘Retailing or wholesaling of cookie molds; wholesaling and retailing of cookie molds via the internet’;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — Daimler v EUIPO (ROAD EFFICIENCY)

(Case T-749/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark ROAD EFFICIENCY - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 423/62)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: P. Kohl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2018 (Case R 2701/2017-5), concerning an application for registration of the word sign ROAD EFFICIENCY as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Daimler AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 November 2019 — Soundio v EUIPO — Telefónica Germany (Vibble)

(Case T-665/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark Vibble - Earlier German word mark vybe - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 27/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Soundio A/S (Drammen, Norway) (represented by: N. Köster and J. Albers, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Telefónica Germany GmbH & Co. OHG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: P. Neuwald, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 September 2018 (Case R 721/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between E-Plus Mobilfunk GmbH and Soundio.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders Soundio A/S to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 November 2019 — Neoperl v EUIPO (Representation of four filled-in holes in a regular hole pattern)

(Case T-669/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for an EU figurative mark representing four filled-in holes in a regular hole pattern - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 10/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Neoperl AG (Reinach, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Börjes-Pestalozza and G. Schultz, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 September 2018 (Case R 2059/2017-5), concerning an application for registration of a sign representing four filled-in holes in a regular hole pattern as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Neoperl AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Japan Tobacco v EUIPO — I.J. Tobacco Industry (I.J. TOBACCO INDUSTRY)

(Case T-743/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark I.J. TOBACCO INDUSTRY - Earlier EU figurative mark JTi - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 61/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Japan Tobacco, Inc. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J. Gracia Albero and R. Ahijón Lana, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Śliwińska, J. Ivanauskas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: I.J. Tobacco Industry FZE (Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: A.-E. Malami, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 October 2018 (Case R 979/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Japan Tobacco and I.J. Tobacco Industry.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Japan Tobacco, Inc., to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by I.J. Tobacco Industry FZE.

(1) OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Bulgaria v Commission

(Case T-22/18) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Bulgaria - Rural development - Quality of on-the-spot checks - Review of eligibility and selection criteria - Financial corrections - Ex post controls - Method for calculating financial corrections - Recurrence - Corrective measures - Conformity clearance procedure - Legal certainty - Principle of sound financial management - Proportionality)

(2020/C 54/51)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Bulgaria (represented by: E. Petranova and L. Zaharieva, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina, G. Koleva and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/2014 of 8 November 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2017 L 292, p. 61).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Bulgaria to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Hungary v Commission

(Case T-505/18) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Support for rural development - Support granted to producer groups - Expenditure incurred by Hungary - Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 - Qualified recognition - Eligibility of the beneficiary of the aid - Calculated financial correction - Article 52(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 - Sincere cooperation - Protection of legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Legal certainty - Ineligible amounts)

(2020/C 95/30)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Hungary (represented by: M. Fehér, M. Tátrai, A. Pokoraczki and G. Koós, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and J. Aquilina, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/873 of 13 June 2018 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2018 L 152, p. 29).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hungary to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 January 2020 — Grupo Textil Brownie v EUIPO — The Guide Association (BROWNIE)

(Case T-598/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark BROWNIE - Earlier national word marks BROWNIES, BROWNIE, Brownies and Brownie - 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) - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2020/C 77/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Grupo Textil Brownie, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza and J.C. Quero Navarro, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno, A. Folliard-Monguiral and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: The Guide Association (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. St Quintin, Barrister, and M. Jhittay, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the EUIPO of 4 July 2018 (Case R 2680/2017-2) relating to opposition proceedings between The Guide Association and Grupo Textil Brownie.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Grupo Textil Brownie, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 –Teeäär v ECB

(Case T-547/18) (1)

(Civil service - ECB staff - Programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB - Rejection of an application to take part in that programme - Eligibility conditions - Different lengths of service required depending on whether a staff member is in a single salary band or a salary broadband - Allocation to a salary band on the basis of the type of employment - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Manifest error of assessment)

(2020/C 175/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Raivo Teeäär (Tallinn, Estonia) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: D. Camilleri Podestà and F. Malfrère, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union for, first, annulment of the decision of the ECB of 27 February 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application for the pilot programme of support for transition to a career outside the ECB and, in so far as necessary, the ECB’s decision of 3 July 2018 rejecting the applicant’s special appeal against the abovementioned decision of 27 February 2018 and, secondly, compensation for the damage he allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Raivo Teeäär to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Judgment of the General Court 12 February 2020 — Boshab v Council

(Case T-171/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Right to respect for private and family life - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality)

(2020/C 103/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Évariste Boshab (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Évariste Boshab to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Peek & Cloppenburg v EUIPO — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek)

(Case T-534/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Peek - Earlier national commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Coexistence of the national commercial designation and the mark applied for - Demarcation agreement - Application of national law by EUIPO - Suspension of the administrative proceedings - Article 70 of Regulation 2017/1001 - Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Manifest error of assessment)

(2020/C 215/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: P. Lange, 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: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: A. Renck, M. Petersenn and C. Stöber, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2018 (Case R 115/2005-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg) and Peek & Cloppenburg (Düsseldorf).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2020 — Tecnodidattica v EUIPO (Shape of bases for globes and lamps)

(Case T-752/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of bases for globes and lamps - Absolute ground for refusal - Sign consisting exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result - Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(e)(ii) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No decorative or imaginative elements playing an important or essential role)

(2020/C 209/31)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Tecnodidattica SpA (San Colombano Certenoli, Italy) (represented by: S. Corona and F. Corona, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 October 2018 (Case R 76/2017-2), concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of bases for globes and lamps as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tecnodidattica SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — CA Consumer Finance v ECB

(Case T-578/18) (1)

(Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Administrative pecuniary penalty imposed by the ECB on a credit institution - First subparagraph of Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Continued breach of capital requirements - Negligent breach - Rights of defence - Amount of the penalty - Obligation to state reasons)

(2020/C 329/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: CA Consumer Finance (Massy, France) (represented by: A. Champsaur and A. Delors, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: C. Hernández Saseta, A. Pizzolla and D. Segoin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Decision ECB/SSM/2018-FRCAG-77 of the ECB of 16 July 2018, taken pursuant to Article 18(1) 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 imposing on the applicant an administrative pecuniary penalty of EUR 200 000 for continued breach of the capital requirements laid down in Article 26(3) 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, and corrigenda OJ 2013 L 208, p. 68, and OJ 2013 L 321, p. 6).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Decision ECB/SSM/2018-FRCAG-77 of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 16 July 2018 in so far as it imposes on CA Consumer Finance an administrative pecuniary penalty of EUR 200 000;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders CA Consumer Finance to bear its own costs;

4. Orders the ECB to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 436, 3.12.2018.
1.

Annuls Decision C(2018) 6642 final of the European Commission of 4 October 2018 refusing access to documents in relation to Ireland’s compliance or non-compliance with its obligations under Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union, Council Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments and probation decisions with a view to the supervision of probation measures and alternative sanctions and Council Framework Decision 2009/829/JHA of 23 October 2009 on the application, between Member States of the European Union, of the principle of mutual recognition to decisions on supervision measures as an alternative to provisional detention;
Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — Hermann Albers v Commission

(Case T-597/18) (1)

(State aid - Public transport of passengers - Offsetting of the costs involved in the performance of public service obligations - Obligation to establish maximum tariffs for pupils, students, apprentices and persons with reduced mobility - Article 7a of the Niedersächsisches Nahverkehrsgesetz (Law on local transport of the Land of Lower Saxony) - Decision not to raise objections - Article 3(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 - Transfer of financial resources from a Land to transport authorities at municipal level - Concept of aid - Obligation to notify)

(2020/C 433/53)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Hermann Albers e.K. (Neubörger, Germany) (represented by: S. Roling, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Tomat and K.-P. Wojcik, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller, D. Klebs and S. Heimerl, acting as Agents) and Land Niedersachsen (Germany) (represented by: S. Barth and H. Gading, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 4385 final of 12 July 2018 not to raise objections to the measure adopted by the Land Niedersachsen under Article 7a of the Niedersächsisches Nahverkehrsgesetz (Law on local transport of the Land of Lower Saxony) [Case SA. 46697 (2017/NN)] (OJ 2018 C 292, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hermann Albers e.K. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany and the Land Niedersachsen to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — BPCE and Others v ECB

(Case T-146/18) (1)

(Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Contribution to the deposit guarantee system or to the single resolution fund by means of irrevocable payment commitments - Tasks entrusted to the ECB - Specific supervision powers of the ECB - Article 4(1)(f) and Article 16(1)(c) and (2)(d) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Measure requiring the deduction of the cumulative amount of irrevocable payment commitments outstanding from Tier 1 capital - Absence of individual examination)

(2020/C 399/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: BPCE (Paris, France) and the 36 other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: A. Gosset-Grainville, M. Trabucchi and M. Dalon, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: E. Koupepidou, R. Bax and F. Bonnard, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU for partial annulment, first, of ECB Decision ECB/SSM/2017-9695005MSX1OYEMGDF46/338 of 19 December 2017, and, second, of ECB Decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRBPC-22 of 14 February 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls paragraph 4 of Decision ECB/SSM/2017-9695005MSX1OYEMGDF46/338 of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 19 December 2017 and paragraphs 3.4 to 3.7 of Decision ECB-SSM-2019-FRBPC 22 of the ECB of 14 February 2019;

2. Orders the ECB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.