ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/24

Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2018 — Larko v Commission

(Case T-423/14) (1)

((State aid - Aid implemented by Greece - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - Advantage - Private investor test - Amount of aid to be recovered - Commission Notice on State aid in the form of guarantees))

(2018/C 104/31)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: I. Dryllerakis, I. Soufleros, E. Triantafyllou, G. Psaroudakis, E. Rantos and N. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and É. Gippini Fournier, Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision 2014/539/EU of 27 March 2014 on the State aid SA.34572 (20113/C) (ex 13/NN) implemented by Greece for Larco General Mining & Metallurgical Company S.A. (OJ 2014 L 254, p. 24).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 292, 1.9.2014.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 November 2018 — Tempus Energy and Tempus Energy Technology v Commission

(Case T-793/14) (1)

((State aid - United Kingdom capacity market - Aid scheme - Article 108(2) and (3) TFEU - Concept of doubts within the meaning of Article 4(3) or (4) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 - Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020 - Decision not to raise any objections - No initiation of the formal investigation procedure - Procedural rights of interested parties))

(2019/C 16/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Tempus Energy Ltd (Worcester, United Kingdom) and Tempus Energy Technology Ltd (Cheltenham, United Kingdom) (represented by: initially J. Derenne, J. Blockx, C. Ziegler and M. Kinsella, subsequently J. Derenne, J. Blockx and C. Ziegler, and finally J. Derenne and C. Ziegler, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, R. Sauer, K. Herrmann and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: initially C. Brodie and L. Christie, acting as Agents, and G. Facenna QC, subsequently S. Simmons, M. Holt, C. Brodie and S. Brandon, acting as Agents, and G. Facenna QC, subsequently M. Holt, C. Brodie, S. Brandon and D. Robertson, acting as Agents, and G. Facenna QC, and finally S. Brandon, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 5083 final of 23 July 2014 not to raise objections to the aid scheme for the capacity market in the United Kingdom, on the ground that that scheme is compatible with the internal market pursuant to Article 107(3)(c) TFEU (State aid 2014/N-2) (OJ 2014 C 348, p. 5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2014) 5083 final of 23 July 2014 not to raise objections to the aid scheme for the capacity market in the United Kingdom, on the ground that that scheme is compatible with the internal market pursuant to Article 107(3)(c) TFEU (State aid 2014/N-2);

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Tempus Energy Ltd and Tempus Energy Technology Ltd;

3. Orders the United Kingdom to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 81, 9.3.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2018 — Bourdouvali and Others v Council and Others

(Case T-786/14) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Economic and monetary policy - Stability support programme for Cyprus - Decision of the Governing Council of the ECB relating to emergency liquidity assistance following a request from the Central Bank of Cyprus - Euro Group Statements of 25 March, 12 April, 13 May and 13 September 2013 concerning Cyprus - Decision 2013/236/EU - Memorandum of Understanding of 26 April 2013 on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the European Stability Mechanism - Jurisdiction of the General Court - Admissibility - Formal requirements - Exhaustion of national rights of action - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals - Right to property - Legitimate expectations - Equal treatment))

(2018/C 352/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Eleni Pavlikka Bourdouvali (Meneou, Cyprus) and 51 other applicants whose names are included in the annex (represented by: P. Tridimas, barrister).

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. de Gregorio Merino, E. Moro and E. Chatziioakeimidou, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: J.-P. Keppenne, M. Konstantinidis and L. Flynn, acting as Agents), European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: K. Laurinavičius and M. Szablewska, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, avocat), Eurogroupe, represented by: the Council of the European Union (represented by M. A. de Gregorio Merino, Mmes E. Moro and E. Chatziioakeimidou, acting as Agents), European Union, represented by the European Commission (represented by J.-P. Keppenne, M. Konstantinidis and L. Flynn, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of the decision of the Governing Council of the ECB of 21 March 2013 relating to emergency liquidity assistance following a request from the Central Bank of Cyprus, the Euro Group Statements of 25 March, 12 April, 13 May and 13 September 2013 concerning Cyprus, Council Decision 2013/236/EU of 25 April 2013 addressed to Cyprus on specific measures to restore financial stability and sustainable growth (OJ 2013 L 141, p. 32), the Memorandum of Understanding of 26 April 2013 on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality concluded between the Republic of Cyprus and the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), and other acts and conduct of the Commission, Council, the ECB and the Euro Group connected with the grant of a financial assistance facility to the Republic of Cyprus.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mrs Eleni Pavlikka Bourdouvali and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to bear, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union, by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB).

(1) OJ C 73, 2.3.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2018 — Niche Generics v Commission

(Case T-701/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for perindopril, a medicinal product intended for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, in its originator and generic versions - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Patent dispute settlement agreement - Administrative procedure - Legal professional privilege protecting communications between lawyers and their clients - Potential competition - Restriction of competition by object - Objective necessity of the restriction - Balance between competition law and patent law - Conditions for exemption under Article 101(3) TFEU - Fines - 10 % cap - Imputation of the unlawful conduct))

(2019/C 82/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Niche Generics Ltd (Hitchin, United Kingdom) (represented by E. Batchelor, M. Healy, K. Cousins, Solicitors, and F. Carlin, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by F. Castilla Contreras, T. Vecchi and B. Mongin, and subsequently by F. Castilla Contreras, B. Mongin and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents, and by S. Kingston, Barrister-at-law)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 4955 final of 9 July 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 and Article 102 TFEU [Case AT.39612 — Perindopril (Servier)] in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Niche Generics Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/19

Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Zitro IP v OHIM (TRIPLE BONUS)

(Case T-318/15) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community figurative mark TRIPLE BONUS - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 078/29)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Zitro IP Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Canela Giménez, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Crawcour and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 April 2015 (Case R 1648/2014-4) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign TRIPLE BONUS as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Zitro IP Sàrl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2016 — Niagara Bottling v EUIPO (NIAGARA)

(Case T-89/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark NIAGARA - Absolute grounds for refusal - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 211/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Niagara Bottling LLC (Ontario, United States) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: A. Jakab, A. Schifko and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 December 2014 (Case R 784/2014-5), concerning the international registration designating the European Union of the word mark NIAGARA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Niagara Bottling LLC to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 156/41

Judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2016 — Dextro Energy v European Commission

(Case T-100/15) (1)

((Consumer protection - Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 - Health claims made on foods, other than those referring to the reduction of disease risk and to children’s development and health - Refusal to authorise certain claims despite the positive opinion of the EFSA - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Duty to state reasons))

(2016/C 156/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Dextro Energy GmbH & Co. KG (Krefeld, Germany) (represented by: M. Hagenmeyer and T. Teufer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Grünheid, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/8 of 6 January 2015 refusing to authorise certain health claims made on foods, other than those referring to the reduction of disease risk and to children’s development and health (OJ 2015 L 3, p. 6).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Dextro Energy GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 11.5.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 251/28

Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2016 — Grupo Bimbo v EUIPO (Form of a bar with four circles)

(Case T-240/15) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for three-dimensional European Union trade mark - Form of a bar with four circles - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rights of the defence - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 251/31)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Grupo Bimbo, SAB de CV (Mexico City, Mexico) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández Pacheco, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Muñiz Rodríguez and A. Schifko, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 March 2015 (Case R 1602/2014 1) concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the form of a bar with four circles as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Grupo Bimbo, SAB de CV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 236, 20.7.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/18

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2016 — Market Watch v EUIPO — El Corte Inglés (MITOCHRON)

(Case T-62/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MITOCHRON - Earlier EU figurative mark mito - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 232/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Market Watch Franchise & Consulting, Inc. (Freeport, Bahamas) (represented by: J. Korab, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2014 (Case R 508/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés, SA, and Market Watch Franchise & Consulting, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Market Watch Franchise & Consulting, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 326/25

Judgment of the General Court of 20 July 2016 — Reisenthel v EUIPO (keep it easy)

(Case T-308/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for word mark keep it easy - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 326/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Peter Reisenthel (Gilching, Germany) (represented by: E. A. Busse, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 March 2015 (Case R 2659/2014-5), concerning an application for registration of the word sign keep it easy as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Peter Reisenthel to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 305/30

Judgment of the General Court of 6 July 2016 — Mozzett v EUIPO — di Lelio (Alfredo alla Scrofa)

(Case T-96/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity - Figurative EU trade mark Alfredo alla Scrofa - Earlier national word mark L’ORIGINALE ALFREDO - Request for proof of genuine use - Article 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 305/41)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Mario Mozzetti (Rome, Italy) (represented by: E. Montelione, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ines di Lelio (Rome) (represented by: D. De Simone, G. Orsoni and R. Fecchio, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2014 (Case R 655/2014-1), relating to proceedings for a declaration of invalidity between Ms di Lelio and Mr Mozzetti.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mario Mozzetti to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 127, 20.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/41

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Arrom Conseil v EUIPO — Nina Ricci (Roméo has a Gun by Romano Ricci)

(Case T-359/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for registration of the EU figurative mark Roméo has a Gun by Romano Ricci - Earlier EU word marks NINA RICCI and RICCI - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or reputation of the earlier marks - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 402/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Arrom Conseil (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Herissay Ducamp and J. Blanchard, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Nina Ricci SARL (Paris, France) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 April 2015 (Case R 1021/2014-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Nina Ricci SARL and Arrom Conseil.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Arrom Conseil to bear its own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office and Nina Ricci SARL.

(1) OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/39

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — Trinity Haircare v EUIPO — Advance Magazine Publishers (VOGUE)

(Case T-453/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative trade mark VOGUE - Absolute ground for refusal - No descriptive character - Distinctiveness - Article 52(1)(a), read in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 392/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Trinity Haircare AG (Herisau, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Kroher and K. Bach, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: D. Ivison, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 May 2015 (Case R 2426/2014-4) relating to invalidity proceedings between Advance Magazine Publishers and Trinity Haircare.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Trinity Haircare AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc.

(1) OJ C 320, 28.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 419/39

Judgment of the General Court of 29 September 2016 — Universal Protein Supplements v EUIPO (Representation of a body builder)

(Case T-335/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for registration of an EU figurative mark representing a body-builder - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 419/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Universal Protein Supplements Corp. (New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 March 2015 (Case R 2958/2014-5) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a body-builder as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Universal Protein Supplements Corp. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 410/15

Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — Lacamanda Group v EUIPO — Woolley (HENLEY)

(Case T-362/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark HENLEY - Earlier United Kingdom and EU word marks HENLEYS - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier mark))

(2016/C 410/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Lacamanda Group Ltd (Manchester, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Scott, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Nigel Woolley (Braceborough, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2015 (Case R 2255/2012-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between The Lacamanda Group and Nigel Woolley.

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 24 April 2015 (Case R 2255/2012-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those of The Lacamanda Group Ltd;

3. Orders Mr Nigel Woolley to bear his own costs.

(1) OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 462/20

Judgment of the General Court of 27 October 2016 — Commission v CX

(Case T-493/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Disciplinary procedure - Disciplinary sanction - Removal from post - Right to be heard - Article 22 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations - Errors of law - Distortion of the evidence - Incomplete examination of the facts and evidence))

(2016/C 462/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Other party to the proceedings: CX (Enghien, Belgium) (represented by: É. Boigelot, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 June 2015, CX v Commission (F-5/14, EU:F:2015:61), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 June 2015, CX v Commission (F-5/14, EU:F:2015:61);

2. Refers the case back to a Chamber of the General Court of the European Union other than the Chamber which has ruled on the present appeal;

3. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 9.11.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 428/14

Judgment of the General Court of 11 October 2016 — Perry Ellis International Group v EUIPO — CG (p)

(Case T-350/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark likely to be perceived as the letter ‘p’ - Earlier EU and national figurative marks P PROTECTIVE and P - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 428/15)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd (Nassau, Bahamas) (represented by: O. Günzel, V. Ahmann and C. Tenkhoff, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH (Gevelsberg, Germany) (represented by: T. Körber and T.- E. Vlah, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2015 (Case R 2441/2014-4) relating to opposition proceedings between CG Verwaltungsgesellschaft and Perry Ellis International Group Holdings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Perry Ellis International Group Holdings Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.