ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González v EUIPO — Ireland and Ornua (La Irlandesa 1943)

(Case T-306/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark La Irlandesa 1943 - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Declaration of invalidity by the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court - Relevant date for the examination of an absolute ground for invalidity - Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2022/C 318/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain) (represented by: J. García Domínguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, D. Hanf and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Ireland

Other party to the proceedings before the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ornua Co-operative Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and A. Sanz Cerralbo, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Grand Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 March 2020 (Case R 1499/2016-G).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2022 — Krasnyj Octyabr v EUIPO — Pokój (KRÓWKA MLECZNA Milk FUDGE)

(Case T-363/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark KRÓWKA MLECZNA Milk FUDGE - Earlier international figurative mark KOPOBKA KOROVKA - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 294/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: PAO Moscow Confectionery Factory ‘Krasnyj Octyabr’ (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: M. Geitz and J. Stock, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Spółdzielnia ‘Pokój’ (Bielsko-Biała, Poland) (represented by: E. Pijewska and M. Mazurek, 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 7 April 2020 (Case R 1532/2019-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders PAO Moscow Confectionery Factory ‘Krasnyj Octyabr’ to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — SŽ — Tovorni promet v Commission

(Case T-575/20) (1)

(Directive 2014/25/EU - Procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors - Implementing Decision on the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25 on railway freight transport in Slovenia - Direct exposure to competition - Product market definition - Geographic market definition - Assessment of direct exposure to competition - Principle of good administration - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 432/23)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Parties

Applicant: SŽ — Tovorni promet d.o.o. (Ljubljana, Slovenia) (represented by: V. Cukrov, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Talabér-Ritz, L. Wildpanner and P. Ondrůšek, acting as Agents, and by M. Menard, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1025 of 13 July 2020 on the applicability of Article 34 of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council to railway freight transport in Slovenia (OJ 2020 L 226, p. 5).

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SŽ — Tovorni promet d.o.o. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2022 — JF v EUCAP Somalia

(Case T-194/20) (1)

(Arbitration clause - International contract staff of EUCAP Somalia - Common Foreign and Security Policy mission - Non-renewal of employment contract following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union - Right to be heard - Equal treatment - Non-discrimination on grounds of nationality - Transition period provided for in the agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union - Action for annulment - Action for damages - Acts inseparable from the contract - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 359/74)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: JF (represented by: A. Kunst, lawyer)

Defendant: EUCAP Somalia (represented by: E. Raoult, lawyer)

Re:

By his action, the applicant, seeks, first, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, annulment of EUCAP Somalia’s note of 18 January 2020 and the letter of 29 January 2020 by which it decided not to renew his contract of employment and, secondly, on the basis of Article 268 TFEU, compensation for the damage he suffered as a result of those acts, and, in the alternative, on the basis of Article 272 TFEU, that the contested acts be declared unlawful and compensation for the damage he suffered as a result of those acts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders JF to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2022 — Westfälische Drahtindustrie and Others v Commission

(Case T-275/20) (1)

(Action for annulment and for damages - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for prestressing steel - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Suspension of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee - Payment by instalments on a provisional basis - Judgment annulling in part the decision and setting a fine in an amount identical to the amount of the fine originally imposed - Application of payments made on a provisional basis - Default interest - First paragraph of Article 266 TFEU - Unjust enrichment - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals - Recovery of undue payments - No legal basis - Unlawfulness)

(2023/C 35/55)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH (Hamm, Germany), Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG (Hamm), Pampus Industriebeteiligungen GmbH & Co. KG (Iserlohn, Germany) (represented by: O. Duys and N. Tkatchenko, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi and L. Mantl, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action, the applicants seek, principally, (i), the annulment, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, of the European Commission’s letter of 2 March 2020 by which it gave them formal notice to pay it the sum of EUR 12 236 931,69, corresponding, according to the Commission, to the outstanding balance of the fine imposed on them on 30 September 2010; (ii), a finding that the fine was paid in full on 17 October 2019 by the payment of EUR 18 149 636,24; and, (iii), an order that the Commission pay WDI the sum of EUR 1 633 085,17, plus interest from that latter date, on account of unjust enrichment on the part of that institution. In the alternative, the applicants request under Article 268 TFEU that the Commission be ordered to pay them the sum of EUR 12 236 931,69, claimed by the Commission from the applicant WDI, and a sum equivalent to the amount of overpayment to that institution of EUR 1 633 085,17, plus interest as of 17 October 2019, until the repayment in full of the amount owed.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH, Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and Pampus Industriebeteiligungen GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — JS v SRB

(Case T-271/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Time limit for complaints - Admissibility - Psychological harassment - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Rejection of the request - Absence of prima facie evidence - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Liability)

(2023/C 7/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: JS (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: L. Forestier and H. Ehlers, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) of 14 June 2019 rejecting his request for assistance submitted on 2 May 2019 and, in so far as necessary, of the decision of the SRB of 23 January 2020 rejecting his complaint against the decision of 14 June 2019 and, second, compensation for the harm which he claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders JS to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2021 — Fidia farmaceutici v EUIPO — Stelis Biopharma (HYALOSTEL ONE)

(Case T-194/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International figurative registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark HYALOSTEL ONE - Earlier EU word mark HYALISTIL and earlier figurative mark HyalOne - Earlier international word mark HYALO - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2022/C 95/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fidia farmaceutici SpA (Abano Terme, Italy) (represented by: R. Kunz-Hallstein and H.P. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Stelis Biopharma Ltd (Karnataka, India)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2021 (Case R 831/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Fidia Farmaceutici and Stelis Biopharma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 January 2021 (Case R 831/2020-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Fidia farmaceutici SpA in connection with the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 217, 7.6.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Power Horse Energy Drinks v EUIPO — Robot Energy Europe (UNSTOPPABLE)

(Case T-3/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark UNSTOPPABLE - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Lack of descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 481/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Power Horse Energy Drinks GmbH (Linz, Austria) (represented by: M. Woller, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Robot Energy Europe (Mijas, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 October 2020 (Case R 232/2020-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Power Horse Energy Drinks and Robot Energy Europe.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Power Horse Energy Drinks GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 62, 22.2.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ v EUIPO — Bog-Fran (Furniture)

(Case T-1/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an item of furniture - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Disclosure of the earlier design - Article 7(1) of Regulation No 6/2002 - Decision adopted following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision - Res judicata)

(2022/C 171/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ S.A. (Ostrów Mazowiecka, Poland) (represented by: H. Basiński, 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: Bog-Fran sp. z o.o. sp.k. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Mikosza and E. Guissart, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 October 2020 (Case R 595/2020-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Bog-Fran and Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Fabryki Mebli ‘Forte’ S.A. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Bog-Fran sp. z o.o. sp.k..

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

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Estetica Group Iwona Michalak v EUIPO (PURE BEAUTY)

(Case T-270/21) (1)

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

(2022/C 119/54)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Estetica Group Iwona Michalak (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: P. Gutowski, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2021 (Case R 1456/2020-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign PURE BEAUTY as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Estetica Group Iwona Michalak to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 March 2022 — Ionfarma v EUIPO — LG Electronics (AION)

(Case T-465/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark AION - Earlier national figurative mark ION and earlier word mark IONFARMA - Relative ground for refusal - No similarity of the goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 198/67)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ionfarma, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa Rodríguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Lapinskaite and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, South Korea)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 May 2021 (Case R 2223/2020-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ionfarma and LG Electronics.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ionfarma, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 382, 20.9.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 March 2022 — Apologistics v EUIPO — Kerckhoff (apo-discounter.de)

(Case T-140/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark apo-discounter.de - Partial revocation - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use)

(2022/C 191/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Apologistics GmbH (Markkleeberg, Germany) (represented by: H. Hug, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Markus Kerckhoff (Bergisch Gladbach, Germany) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 December 2020 (Case R 1439/2019-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Mr Kerckhoff and Apologistics.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Apologistics GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — Amisi Kumba v Council

(Case T-107/21) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territories of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures)

(2022/C 244/40)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Gabriel Amisi Kumba (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

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

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2020 L 419, p. 30) and, second, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2020 L 419, p. 5), in so far as those acts concern him.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Gabriel Amisi Kumba to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background II)

(Case T-278/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU pattern mark - Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background II - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 213/50)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Siebertz, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1896/2020-5), concerning an application for registration of a pattern sign representing three-pointed stars on a black background II 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 278, 12.7.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Sturz v EUIPO — Clatronic International (STEAKER)

(Case T-261/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark STEAKER - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No distinctive character - Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2022/C 266/26)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Manfred Sturz (Schorndorf, Germany) (represented by: B. Bittner, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Clatronic International GmbH (Kempen, Germany) (represented by: V. Herbort, lawyer)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 March 2021 (Case R 214/2020-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign STEAKER as an EU trade mark, by which the Board of Appeal found that the mark applied for was descriptive of the goods in question.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Manfred Sturz to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 289, 19.7.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — Boshab v Council

(Case T-103/21) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures)

(2022/C 244/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Lejeune, acting as Agent)

Re:

By his action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2020 L 419, p. 30) and, second, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2021 of 10 December 2020 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2020 L 419, p. 5) in so far as those acts concern him.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Évariste Boshab to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Kubara v EUIPO (good calories)

(Case T-602/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark good calories - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations)

(2022/C 303/54)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Kubara sp. z o.o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: A. Suskiewicz, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 July 2021 (Case R 2167/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kubara sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 462, 15.11.2021.