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

Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2022 — Worldwide Machinery v EUIPO — Scaip (SUPERIOR MANUFACTURING)

(Case T-316/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark SUPERIOR MANUFACTURING - Genuine use of the mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 284/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Worldwide Machinery Ltd (Channelview, Texas, United States) (represented by: B. Woltering, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Frydendahl and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Scaip SpA (Parma, Italy) (represented by: B. Saguatti and A. Guareschi, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 March 2021 (Case R 873/2020-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Worldwide Machinery and Scaip.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Worldwide Machinery Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 289, 19.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Advanced Superabrasives v EUIPO — Adi (ASI ADVANCED SUPERABRASIVES)

(Case T-4/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark ASI ADVANCED SUPERABRASIVES - Earlier EU figurative and word marks ADI - 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) - Remittal of the case to the Opposition Division - Article 71(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(3)(b) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)

(2022/C 257/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Advanced Superabrasives, Inc. (Mars Hill, North Carolina, United States) (represented by: D. Piróg and A. Rytel, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Adi Srl (Thiene, Italy) (represented by B. Saguatti, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2020 (Case R 2713/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Adi and Advanced Superabrasives.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Advanced Superabrasives, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 62, 22.2.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — Pejovič v EUIPO — ETA živilska industrija (RENŠKI HRAM)

(Case T-286/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark RENŠKI HRAM - Absolute ground for invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 340/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Edvin Pejovič (Pobegi, Slovenia) (represented by: U. Pogačnik, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the Court: ETA živilska industrija d.o.o. (Kamnik, Slovenia) (represented by: J. Sibinčič, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Mr Edvin Pejovič, seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 March 2021 (Case R 679/2020-4) (‘the contested decision’).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 March 2021 (Case R 679/2020-4);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Edvin Pejovič for the purposes of the present proceedings and for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal;

4. Orders ETA živilska industrija d.o.o. to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Puma v EUIPO — V. Fraas (FRAAS)

(Case T-329/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark FRAAS - Genuine use of a mark - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark was registered - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use)

(2022/C 303/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze and F. Tyra, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 March 2021 (Case R 2714/2019-5).

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) and by V. Fraas GmbH in the context of the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 297, 26.7.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Rauff-Nisthar v Commission

(Case T-341/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Open Competition EPSO/AD/371/19 - Non-inclusion on the reserve list - Irregularities in the conduct of the tests liable to distort the result - Equal treatment - Manifest error of assessment - New plea)

(2022/C 418/34)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Nadya Rauff-Nisthar (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Melo Sampaio and T Lilamand, agents)

Re:

By her action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, annulment of the decision of the selection board of Open Competition EPSO/AD/371/19 for recruitment of adminstrators (AD 7) specialised in scientific research not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list of that competition, in particular in area No 6, entitled ‘Nuclear research and decommissioning of nuclear installations’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Nadya Rauff-Nisthar to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 320, 9.8.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — Gugler France v EUIPO — Gugler (GUGLER)

(Case T-147/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark GUGLER - Absolute ground for invalidity - No bad faith - Article 51(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2022/C 359/78)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Gugler France (Les Auxons, France) (represented by: A. Grolée, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Alexander Gugler (Maxdorf, Germany) (represented by: M. -C. Simon, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 9 December 2020 (Case R 893/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gugler France to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 163, 3.5.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerk)

(Case T-705/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark STAHLWERK - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 432/34)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Okan Balaban (Bornheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Schaaf, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez and M. Eberl, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment in part and the variation of the examiner’s decision of 18 November 2020 and of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 September 2021 (Case R 77/2021-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Okan Balaban to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — SB v eu-LISA

(Case T-217/21) (1)

(Civil service - Contract staff - Staff of eu-LISA - Dismissal decision at the end of the probationary period - Obligation to state reasons - Normal probationary conditions - Right to be heard - Procedural irregularities - Duty of care - Manifest error of assessment - Principle of sound administration)

(2022/C 418/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: SB (represented by: H. Tagaras, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (represented by: M. Chiodi, acting as Agent, and A. Duron and D. Waelbroeck, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) of 3 August 2020 by which his contract as a member of the contract staff was terminated at the end of the probationary period.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 228, 14.6.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — L. Oliva Torras v EUIPO — Mecánica del Frío (Vehicle couplings)

(Case T-652/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a coupling for connecting refrigeration or air-conditioning equipment to a motor vehicle - Grounds for invalidity - Novelty - Individual character - Articles 5 and 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Disclosure of the earlier design - Article 7 of Regulation No 6/2002 - Scope of the application for a declaration of invalidity - Earlier design produced after the filing of the application for a declaration of invalidity - Article 28(1)(b)(i), (v) and (vi) of Regulation (EC) No 2245/2002)

(2022/C 463/53)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: L. Oliva Torras, SA (Manresa, Spain) (represented by: E. Sugrañes Coca, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 August 2021 (Case R 1306/2020-3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders L. Oliva Torras, S.A., to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 481, 29.11.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — QN v Commission

(Case T-179/21) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Appraisal report - 2019 appraisal procedure - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Liability)

(2022/C 432/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: QN (represented by: L. Levi and N. Flandin, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Brauhoff and L. Hohenecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU, the applicant, QN, seeks, first, annulment of his 2019 appraisal report and, in so far as necessary, annulment of the decision of 22 December 2020 of the European Commission rejecting his complaint and, second, compensation for the non-material damage he allegedly suffered on account of that report.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders QN to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 206, 31.5.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — Basaglia v Commission

(Case T-257/21) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Access to documents - Documents relating to research and technological development projects - Decision limiting the request for access and partially refusing access - Partial annulment by the General Court of that decision - Convictions by national courts - Unlawfulness of the conduct complained of - Causal link)

(2022/C 472/40)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Giorgio Basaglia (Milan, Italy) (represented by: G. Balossi, G. Borriello and F. Fimmanò, lawyers)

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

Re:

By his action under Article 268 TFEU, the applicant seeks compensation for the financial, non-material and reputational damage which he allegedly suffered as a result of the European Commission’s unlawful rejection of his requests for access to documents and its failure to comply with the judgment of 23 September 2020, Basaglia v Commission (T-727/19, not published, EU:T:2020:446).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Giorgio Basaglia to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 252, 28.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2022 — Les Bordes Golf International v EUIPO — Mast-Jägermeister (LES BORDES)

(Case T-696/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark LES BORDES - Earlier international figurative mark consisting of inter alia a stag’s head - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 463/56)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Les Bordes Golf International (Saint-Laurent-Nouan, France) (represented by: M. Maier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mast-Jägermeister SE (Wolfenbüttel, Germany) (represented by: C. Drzymalla, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Les Bordes Golf International, seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 September 2021 (Case R 67/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Les Bordes Golf International to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2022 — Financiere Batteur v EUIPO — Leno Beauty (by L.e.n.o beauty)

(Case T-779/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark by L.e.n.o beauty - Earlier national word mark LAINO - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2023/C 15/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Financiere Batteur (Hérouville-Saint-Clair, France) (represented by: P. Greffe and F. Donaud, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Leno Beauty Sas (Vintimille, Italy)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 13 October 2021 (Case R 514/2021-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Financiere Batteur to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 73, 14.2.2022.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Louis Vuitton Malletier v EUIPO — Wisniewski (Representation of a chequerboard pattern II)

(Case T-275/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark representing a chequerboard pattern - Absolute ground for invalidity - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) and Article 51(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(3) and Article 59(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Overall assessment of the evidence of distinctive character acquired through use - Geographical scope of the evidence of distinctive character acquired through use - Evidence of use of the mark on the internet - Evidence regarding infringement proceedings)

(2023/C 7/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Louis Vuitton Malletier (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, N. Parrotta and P.-Y. Gautier, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Norbert Wisniewski (Warsaw, Poland)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 February 2021 (Case R 1307/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Louis Vuitton Malletier to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 263, 5.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2022 — Zeta Farmaceutici v EUIPO — Specchiasol (EUPHYTOS)

(Case T-515/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU wordmark EUPHYTOS - Earlier EU figurative mark EuPhidra - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 56(2) and Article 43(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 64(2) and Article 47(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Relevant periods - Submission of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)

(2023/C 35/61)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Zeta Farmaceutici SpA (Vicenza, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica, F. Fischetti and F. De Bono, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Specchiasol Srl (Bussolengo, Italy)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment and alteration of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 10 June 2021 (Case R 2094/2019-1).

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 10 June 2021 (Case R 2094/2019-1);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Zeta Farmaceutici SpA.

(1) OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2022 — Puma v EUIPO — Vaillant (Puma)

(Case T-623/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Puma - Earlier EU figurative mark PUMA - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2023/C 35/63)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke and P. Trieb, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Schäfer, D. Stoyanova-Valchanova and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Vaillant GmbH (Remscheid, Germany) (represented by: S. Abrar, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 July 2021 (Case R 1875/2019-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Puma SE to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2022 — Korporaciya ‘Masternet’ v EUIPO — Stayer Ibérica (STAYER)

(Case T-155/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark STAYER - Genuine use of the mark - Article 15 and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18 and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Classification of the goods in respect of which genuine use has been shown)

(2023/C 35/72)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: ZAO Korporaciya ‘Masternet’ (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: N. Bürglen, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Stayer Ibérica, SA (Pinto, Spain) (represented by: P. Creta, A. Lanzarini, A. Sponzilli, B. Costa and M. Lazzarotto, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 December 2021 (Case R 931/2021-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ZAO Korporaciya ‘Masternet’ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 233/21

Order of the Court of First Instance of 23 July 2009 — Kat and Others v Council and Commission

(Joined Cases T-530/93, T-531/93, T-87/94, T-91/94, T-106/94, T-120/94 and T-124/94) (1)

2009/C 233/38

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the joined cases be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 334, 9.12.1993.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 55/50

Order of the Court of First Instance of 17 December 2008 — Groupe Perry et Isibiris v Commission

(Case T-132/98) (1)

(2009/C 55/90)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 312, 10.10.1998.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 71/19

Order of the General Court of 22 January 2013 — La Vigile San Marco v Commission

(Case T-262/00) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Relief from social security contributions for firms in Venice and Chioggia - Decision declaring the aid scheme to be incompatible with the common market and requiring the recovery of aid paid - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

2013/C 71/29

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: La Vigile San Marco SpA (Venice, Italy) (represented by: A. Vianello, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, Agent, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Italian Republic (initially represented by: U. Leanza, then by I. Braguglia, then by R. Adam, and finally by I. Bruni, Agents, assisted by G. Aiello and P. Gentili, avvocati dello Stato)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000 L 150, p. 50).

Operative part of the order

1. The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance;

2. The action is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly lacking any foundation in law;

3. La Vigile San Marco SpA shall bear the Commission’s costs in addition to its own costs;

4. The Italian Republic shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 9.12.2000.