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

Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2019 — Zhejiang Jndia Pipeline Industry v Commission

(Case T-228/17) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of certain stainless steel tube and pipe butt-welding fittings, whether or not finished, originating in China and Taiwan - Imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties - Normal value - Adjustments - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 399/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Zhejiang Jndia Pipeline Industry Co. Ltd (Wenzhou, China) (represented by: S. Hirsbrunner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche, N. Kuplewatzky and E. Schmidt, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/141 of 26 January 2017 imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain stainless steel tube and pipe butt-welding fittings, whether or not finished, originating in the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan (OJ 2017 L 22, p. 14).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Zhejiang Jndia Pipeline Industry Co. Ltd to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 195, 19.6.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 April 2020 — Hansol Paper v Commission

(Case T-383/17) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of certain lightweight thermal paper originating in South Korea - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Dumping margin calculation - Calculation of the injury margin - Determination of injury)

(2020/C 175/10)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hansol Paper Co. Ltd (Seoul, South Korea) (represented by: J.F. Bellis and B. Servais, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Demeneix, M. França and N. Kuplewatzky, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Thermal Paper Association (ETPA) (Zürich, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Hobbelen, J. Rivas Andrés and B. Vleeshouwers, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/763 of 2 May 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain lightweight thermal paper originating in the Republic of Korea (OJ 2017 L 114, p. 3), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Removes the document reproduced in Annex A.32 to the application from the case file;

2. Annuls Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/763 of 2 May 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain lightweight thermal paper originating in the Republic of Korea, in so far as it concerns Hansol Paper Co. Ltd;

3. Orders the European Commission to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Hansol Paper;

4. Orders the European Thermal Paper Association (ETPA) to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 14.8.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2019 — Help — Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe v Commission

(Case T-335/17) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Food security programme for very food insecure farming households in Zimbabwe (ECHO/ZWE/BUD/2009/02002) - Reclassification of the action - Audit reports - Audit report of the Court of Auditors - OLAF Report - Reimbursement of the sums paid - Proportionality - Legitimate expectations)

(2019/C 432/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Help — Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe (Bonn, Germany) (represented initially by V. Jungkind and P. Cramer, and subsequently by V. Jungkind and F. Geber, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by A. Aresu, K. Blanck and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission decision Ares(2017)1515573 of 21 March 2017 by which a partial amount of the funding for the assistance project ECHO/ZWE/BUD/2009/02002 was to be recovered, as well as the payment request based thereupon and, second, application under Article 272 TFEU seeking an order that the Commission reimburse the sum of EUR 643 627,72 paid by the applicant to the Commission, in accordance with the decision of 21 March 2017 and the payment requests of 7 April and 5 September 2017.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Help — Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO — M. J. Dairies (BBQLOUMI)

(Case T-328/17 RENV) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark BBQLOUMI - Earlier EU collective word mark HALLOUMI - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 79/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, V. Marsland, Solicitor, and S. Barran, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: M.J. Dairies EOOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: D. Dimitrova, avocate)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2017 (Case R 497/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi and M. J. Dairies.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi to pay the costs relating to the proceedings instituted before the General Court and to the proceedings on the appeal before the Court of Justice.

(1) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Portigon v SRB

(Case T-420/17) (1)

(Economic and monetary union - Banking union - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - Single Resolution Fund (SRF) - Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions - Action for annulment - Direct and individual concern - Admissibility - Essential procedural requirements - Authentication of the decision - Obligation to state reasons - Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment)

(2020/C 390/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Portigon AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: D. Bliesener, V. Jungkind and F. Geber, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: P. Messina and J. Kerlin, acting as Agents, and B. Meyring, S. Schelo and T. Klupsch, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Steiblytė and K.-Ph. Wojcik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Single Resolution Board in its executive session of 11 April 2017 on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/SRF/2017/05) in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) of 11 April 2017 on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/SRF/2017/05) in so far as it concerns Portigon AG;

2. Orders the SRB to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Portigon;

3. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — EKETA v Commission

(Case T-189/17) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Humabio contract concluded under the Sixth Framework Programme - Eligible costs - Debit note issued by the Commission for the recovery of amounts advanced - Reliability of the time records - Conflict of interests)

(2022/C 95/29)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA) (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Katsimerou, O. Verheecke, T. Adamopoulos and J. Estrada de Solà, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 272 TFEU seeking a declaration, first, that the request made to the applicant by the Commission in debit note No 3241615288 of 29 November 2016 to reimburse to it the sum of EUR 64 720,19 of the payment received for a study on a research project called Humabio is, in the amount of EUR 10 436,36, unfounded, and, second, that the sum in dispute corresponds to eligible costs which the applicant is not required to reimburse.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 151, 15.5.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Italy and Spain v Commission

(Cases T-695/17 and T-704/17) (1)

(Rules on languages - Notice of open competitions for the recruitment of German-language translators, French-language translators, Italian-language translators and Dutch-language translators - Restriction of the choice of languages 2 and 3 in the competitions to German, English and French - Regulation No 1 - Article 1d(1) and (6), Article 27 and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations - Discrimination based on language - Interests of the service - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 310/20)

Languages of the cases: Italian and Spanish

Parties

Applicant in Case T-695/17: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato)

Applicant in Case T-704/17: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara, D. Milanowska, N. Ruiz García and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of the notice of open competitions to draw up reserve lists for the recruitment of German-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/343/17), French-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/344/17), Italian-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/345/17) and Dutch-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/346/17) (OJ 2017 C 224 A, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-695/17 and T-704/17 for the purposes of the judgment;

2. Annuls the notice of open competitions to draw up reserve lists for the recruitment German-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/343/17), French-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/344/17), Italian-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/345/17) and Dutch-language translators (AD 5) (EPSO/AD/346/17);

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Italian Republic in Case T-695/17 and those incurred by the Kingdom of Spain in Case T-704/17.

(1) OJ C 424, 11.12.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2022 — Eleveté Invest Group and Others v Commission and SRB

(Case T-523/17) (1)

(Economic and monetary union - Banking Union - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - Resolution procedure applicable where an entity is failing or is likely to fail - Adoption by the SRB of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español - Right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Articles 18 and 20 of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 - Non-contractual liability)

(2022/C 294/25)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Eleveté Invest Group, SL (Madrid, Spain) and the other 19 applicants whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: B. Cremades Roman, J. López Useros, S. Cajal Martín and P. Marrodán Lázaro, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and A. Steiblytė, acting as Agents, and by J. Rivas Andrés, lawyer), Single Resolution Board (represented by: J. King and M. Fernández Rupérez, acting as Agents, and by B. Meyring, S. Schelo, F. Fernández de Trocóniz Robles, T. Klupsch and S. Ianc, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendants: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: J. Rodríguez de la Rúa Puig and L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agents), Banco Santander, SA (Santander, Spain) (represented by: J. Rodríguez Cárcamo, A. Rodríguez Conde, D. Sarmiento Ramírez-Escudero and J. Remón Peñalver, lawyers)

Re:

First, application based on Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Decision SRB/EES/2017/08 of the Executive Session of the SRB of 7 June 2017 concerning the adoption of a resolution scheme in respect of Banco Popular Español, SA, and for annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1246 of 7 June 2017 endorsing the resolution scheme for Banco Popular Español S.A. (OJ 2017 L 178, p. 15), second, application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicants claim to have suffered as a result of those decisions and, third, application for a declaration that the provisional valuation is invalid, and for compensation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Eleveté Invest Group, SL and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission, the Single Resolution Board (SRB) and Banco Santander, SA;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 374, 6.11.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Deutsche Lufthansa and Others v Commission

(Case T-342/17) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for airfreight - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport - Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) - Exchange of information - Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission - Obligation to state reasons - Effect on trade between Member States - State coercion - Single and continuous infringement)

(2022/C 207/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Deutsche Lufthansa AG (Cologne, Germany), Lufthansa Cargo AG (Frankfurt am Main, Germany), Swiss International Air Lines AG (Basle, Switzerland) (represented by: S. Völcker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes and H. Leupold, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) in so far as it relates to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear one third of its own costs;

3. Orders Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Lufthansa Cargo AG, Swiss International Air Lines AG to bear their own costs and to pay two thirds of those incurred by the Commission.

(1) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2019 — Equity Cheque Capital Corporation v EUIPO (DIAMOND CARD)

(Case T-91/18) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark DIAMOND CARD - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 93/77)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Equity Cheque Capital Corporation (Victoria, Canada) (represented by: I. Berkeley, Barrister, P. Wheeler and C. Rani, Solicitors)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 December 2017 (Case R 1544/2017-4), relating to an application for registration of the figurative sign DIAMOND CARD as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Equity Cheque Capital Corporation to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 November 2018 — AB Mauri Italy v EUIPO — Lesaffre (FERMIN)

(Case T-78/18) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for registration of the EU word mark FERMIN - Earlier international and Benelux word marks FERMIPAN - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2019/C 44/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: AB Mauri Italy SpA (Casteggio, Italy) (represented by: B. Brandreth, Barrister, and G. Hussey, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Bonne and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Lesaffre et Cie (Paris, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2017 (Joined Cases R 2027/2016-4 and R 2254/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between AB Mauri Italy and Lesaffre et Cie.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2017 (Joined Cases R 2027/2016-4 and R 2254/2016–4) in so far as it rejected, for lack of similarity with ‘yeast’ in Class 30, the opposition to registration of the word mark FERMIN in respect of some of the goods in the same class, namely ‘mixes for bakery products; bakery mixtures (ready-to-use bread mixes); yeast- based preparations for pastries and pizza dough’;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by AB Mauri Italy SpA.

(1) OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 February 2019 — Torro Entertainment v EUIPO — Grupo Osborne (TORRO Grande MEAT IN STYLE)

(Case T-63/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark TORRO Grande MEAT IN STYLE - Earlier EU word marks TORO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Duty of care - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2019/C 131/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Torro Entertainment (Plovdiv, Bulgaria) (represented by: A. Kostov, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Grupo Osborne, SA (El Puerto de Santa María, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 December 2017 (Case R 1776/2017-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Grupo Osborne and Torro Entertainment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Torro Entertainment Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2019 — Gruppo Armonie v EUIPO (ARMONIE)

(Case T-88/18) (1)

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

(2019/C 103/50)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Gruppo Armonie SpA (Casalgrande, Italy) (represented by: G. Medri, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 December 2017 (Case R 2063/2017-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign ARMONIE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gruppo Armonie SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 134, 16.4.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 10 April 2019 — AV v Commission

(Case T-303/18 RENV) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary agents - Engagement - Article 13 of the CEOS - Pre-engagement medical examination - Incomplete declarations at the medical examination - Failure of the person concerned to declare an illness - Subsequent discovery by the AECE - Retroactive application of medical cover deferment for five years - Referral to the Invalidity Committee - Reasonable time limit - Responsibility - Non-material injury)

(2019/C 187/80)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: AV (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Commission of 16 September 2014 by which the authority empowered to conclude contracts of employment of that institution decided to apply to the applicant the medical reservation clause provided for in Article 32 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union and not to grant him an invalidity allowance and, second, compensation for the harm he has allegedly suffered in connection with that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Rejects the claims for annulment;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay AV an amount of EUR 3 000;

3. Rejects the claim for damages for the remainder;

4. Orders AV and the Commission each to pay their own costs pertaining to the initial proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union, in the action in Case F-91/15 and in the present appeal proceedings in T-303/18 RENV.

(1) OJ C 406, 7.12.2015 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-91/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2019 — Zakłady Chemiczne ‘Siarkopol’ Tarnobrzeg v EUIPO — EuroChem Agro (Unifoska)

(Case T-259/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Unifoska - Earlier EU word mark NITROFOSKA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 172/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Zakłady Chemiczne ‘Siarkopol’ Tarnobrzeg (Tarnobrzeg, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: EuroChem Agro GmbH (Mannheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Schmidhuber and A. Haberer, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2018 (Case R 1503/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between EuroChem Agro and Zakłady Chemiczne ‘Siarkopol’ Tarnobrzeg.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Zakłady Chemiczne ‘Siarkopol’ Tarnobrzeg sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 221, 25.6.2018.