ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 383/12

Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2016 — Victor international v EUIPO — Ovejero Jiménez and Becerra Guibert (VICTOR)

(Case T-204/14) (1)

((EU Trade Mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark VICTOR - Earlier national figurative mark victoria - Relative ground for refusal - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Nature of use - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Article 15(1) and Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 383/17)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Victor International GmbH (Elmshorn, Germany) (represented by: R. Kaase and J.-C. Plate, lawyers)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, interveners before the Court: Gregorio Ovejero Jiménez (Alicante, Spain) and María Luisa Cristina Becerra Guibert (Alicante) (represented by: M. Veiga Serrano, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2014 (Case R 2208/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Ovejero Jiménez and Ms Becerra Guibert, on the one hand, and Victor International, on the other.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Victor International GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 410/11

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2016 — Tose’e Ta’avon Bank v Council

(Case T-435/14) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Plea of illegality - Conferral of an implementing power on the Council - Criterion directed at the entities providing support to the Iranian Government - Error of law - Error of fact - Obligation to state reasons - Proportionality - Fundamental rights))

(2016/C 410/13)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Tose’e Ta’avon Bank (Teheran, Iran) (represented by: J.-M. Thouvenin, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Vitro and M. Bishop, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Council of the European Union to maintain the applicant’s name on the list in Annex II to Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 39) and on the list in Annex IX to Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), as set out in a notice of 15 March 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tose’e Ta’avon Bank to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 46/19

Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2016 — IPSO v ECB

(Case T-713/14) (1)

((ECB - ECB staff - Interim employees - Restriction on the maximum length of service of an interim employee - Action for annulment - Act open to challenge - Directly and individually affected - Locus standi - Time limit for bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Failure to inform and consult the applicant union - Non-contractual liability))

(2017/C 046/21)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: International and European Public Services Organisation (IPSO) (Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented initially by: B. Ehlers, I. Köpfer and M. López Torres, and subsequently by: B. Ehlers, P. Pfeifhofer and F. Malfrère, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of an act of the Executive Board of the ECB of 20 May 2014 restricting to two years the maximum period for which the ECB may avail itself of the services of any interim employee for administrative and secretarial tasks and, in addition, an action on the basis of Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the non-pecuniary loss suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Executive Board of the ECB of 20 May 2014 restricting to two years the maximum period for which the ECB may avail itself of the services of any interim employee for administrative and secretarial tasks;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the ECB to bear its own costs and to pay three-quarters of the costs incurred by the International and European Public Services Organisation (IPSO). Orders IPSO to bear a quarter of its own costs.

(1) OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/33

Judgment of the General Court of 9 November 2016 — Birkenstock Sales v EUIPO (representing a pattern of wavy, crisscrossing lines)

(Case T-579/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark representing a pattern of wavy, crisscrossing lines - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Surface pattern - Application of a pattern on the packaging of a product))

(2017/C 006/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Birkenstock Sales GmbH (Vettelschoß, Germany) (represented by: C. Menebröcker and V. Töbelmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: initially G. Schneider and D. Walicka, and subsequently D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2014 (Case R 1952/2013-1), concerning the international registration designating the European Union of the figurative mark representing a pattern of wavy, crisscrossing lines.

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 15 May 2014 (Case R 1952/2013-1) in so far as it concerns the following goods: ‘artificial limbs, eyes and teeth’, ‘suture materials; suture materials for operations’ and ‘animal skins, hides’;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Birkenstock Sales GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay half of those incurred by EUIPO, and EUIPO to bear half of its own costs.

(1) OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 121/23

Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — Yingli Energy (China) and Others v Council

(Case T-160/14) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (cells) originating in or consigned from China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Undertakings - Action for annulment - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Exporting country - Scope of the investigation - Sampling - Normal value - Definition of the product concerned - Time limit for the adoption of a decision on a market economy treatment claim - Temporal application of new provisions - Injury - Causal link - Rights of the defence - Calculation of the injury margin))

(2017/C 121/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Yingli Energy (China) Co. Ltd (Baoding, China) and the 14 other applicants whose names appear in the annex to the judgment (represented initially by A. Willems, S. De Knop and J. Charles, and subsequently by A. Willems and S. De Knop, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen, acting as Agent, B. O’Connor, Solicitor, and S. Gubel, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, and subsequently by J.-F. Brakeland, T. Maxian Rusche, and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 of 2 December 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 325, p. 1), in so far as it applies to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Yingli Energy (China) Co. Ltd, and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/17

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Commission v Verile and Gjergji

(Case T-104/14 P-INTP) (1)

((Proceedings - Interpretation of the judgment))

(2017/C 078/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Marco Verile (Cadrezzate, Italy) and Anduela Gjergji (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Re:

Request for interpretation of the judgment of 13 October 2015, Commission v Verile and Gjergji (T-104/14 P, EU:T:2015:776).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Paragraph 3 of the operative part of the judgment of 13 October 2015, Commission v Verile and Gjergji (T-104/14), must be interpreted as meaning that it covers both the costs relating to the appeal proceedings and those relating to the proceedings at first instance;

2) Mr Marco Veril and Ms Anduela Gjergji, on the one hand, and the European Commission, on the other, shall each bear their own costs relating to the proceedings for interpretation;

3) The original of this judgment shall be appended to the original of the judgment interpreted in the margin of which reference shall be made to this judgment.

(1) OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 283/30

Judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2017 — Rosenich v EUIPO

(Case T-527/14) (1)

((Internal market - Decision of EUIPO rejecting a request for inclusion on the list of professional representatives - Condition relating to the existence of a place of business within the European Union - Article 93(2)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Freedom to provide services - Article 36 of the EEA Agreement - Consistent interpretation))

(2017/C 283/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Paul Rosenich (Triesenberg, Liechtenstein) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and C. Eckhartt, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: initially, G. Schneider and, subsequently, D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 April 2014 (Case R 2063/2012-4), concerning the refusal of EUIPO to enter the applicant on the list of professional representatives provided for in Article 93 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the European Union trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

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 29 April 2014 (Case R 2063/2012-4);

2. Annuls the decision of the Director of the Operations Support Department of EUIPO of 7 September 2012;

3. Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 462, 22.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 161/20

Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Regione autonoma della Sardegna v Commission

(Case T-219/14) (1)

((State aid - Maritime transport - Public service compensation - Capital increase - Decision declaring aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering that it be recovered - Liquidation of the recipient undertaking - Continued interest in bringing proceedings - Failure to find that there was no need to adjudicate - Concept of aid - Service of general economic interest - Private investor test - Manifest error of assessment - Error of law - Plea of illegality - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Decision 2011/21/EU - Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty - Union framework applicable to State aid in the form of public service compensation - Altmark judgment))

(2017/C 161/27)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Regione autonoma della Sardegna (Italy) (represented by: T. Ledda, S. Sau, G.M. Roberti, G. Bellitti and I. Perego, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Conte, D. Grespan and A. Bouchagiar, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Compagnia Italiana di Navigazione SpA (Naples, Italy) (represented initially by F. Sciaudone, R. Sciaudone, D. Fioretti and A. Neri, and subsequently by M. Merola, B. Carnevale and M. Toniolo, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2013) 9101 final of 22 January 2014 concerning aid measures SA.32014 (2011/C), SA.32015 (2011/C), SA.32016 (2011/C) granted by the Autonomous Region of Sardinia (Italy) to the maritime company Saremar in the form of public service compensation and a capital increase, in so far as that decision found those measures to be State aid incompatible with the internal market and ordered that it be recovered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Regione autonoma della Sardegna (Italy) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and Compagnia Italiana di Navigazione SpA.

(1) OJ C 175, 10.6.2014.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — LS Cable & System v Commission

(Case T-439/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreement, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Single and continuous infringement - Sufficient proof - Contributing to the single objective of the infringement - Knowledge of key elements of the infringement - Calculation of the fine - Basic amount - Paragraph 18 of the Guidelines - Gravity of the infringement - Proportionality - Mitigating circumstances - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2018/C 328/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LS Cable & System Ltd (Anyang-si, South Korea) (represented by: S. Kinsella and S. Spinks, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Giolito, A. Biolan and N. Khan, and subsequently by N. Khan and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by B. Rayment, Barrister)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LS Cable & System Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/24

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

(Case T-412/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - State aid - Sale of certain assets operated by an undertaking or belonging to that undertaking in the context of a privatisation programme - No economic continuity - Action by the beneficiary of the aid - No interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility))

(2018/C 104/30)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

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

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

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 1805 of 27 March 2014 on the State aid SA.37954 (2013/N) — Greece — Sale of certain assets of Larco General Mining & Metallurgical Company S.A. (OJ 2014 C 156, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

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 4 October 2018 — Daimler v Commission

(Case T-128/14) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to the procedure initiated pursuant to Article 29 of Directive 2007/46/EC allowing a Member State to refuse registration of vehicles seriously jeopardising road safety or having a significant negative impact on the environment or on public health - Refusal of access - Exception relating to the protection of inspections, investigations and audits - General presumption - Aarhus Convention - Refusal to grant access to the file - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)

(2018/C 427/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: C. Arhold, B. Schirmer and N. Wimmer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially by F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, then by G. Wilms and F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, and finally by H. Krämer and F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, acting as Agents, assisted initially by R. Van der Hout, then by R. Van der Hout and C. Wagner, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Simm and A. Jensen, acting as Agents), European Parliament (represented by: N. Görlitz and L. Visaggio, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision ARES (2013) 3715941 of 13 December 2013 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the procedure initiated by the French Republic pursuant to Article 29 of Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles (Framework Directive) (OJ 2007 L 263, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls European Commission Decision ARES (2013) 3715941 of 13 December 2013 refusing to grant Daimler AG access to documents relating to the procedure initiated by the French Republic pursuant to Article 29 of Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles (Framework Directive);

2. Orders the Commission to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by Daimler;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Pirelli & C. v Commission

(Case T-455/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Imputability of the infringement - Presumption - Obligation to state reasons - Fundamental rights - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Beneficium ordinis seu excussionis - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2018/C 328/54)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Pirelli & C. SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented initially by: M. Siragusa, F. Moretti, G. Rizza and P. Ferrari, and subsequently by M. Siragusa, F. Moretti, G. Rizza and A. Bardanzellu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Giolito, L. Malferrari and P. Rossi, and subsequently by H. van Vliet, L. Malferrari and P. Rossi, acting as Agents, and by P. Manzini, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl (Milan) (represented by: C. Tesauro, F. Russo and L. Armati, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Pirelli & C. SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

3. Orders Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Infineon Technologies v Commission

(Case T-758/14 RENV) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for smart card chips - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Exchanges of commercially sensitive information - Unlimited jurisdiction - Calculation of the amount of the fine - Taking into consideration of the participation only in a part of a network of bilateral contacts between competitors)

(2020/C 339/11)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Infineon Technologies AG (Neubiberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Dreher, T. Lübbig and M. Klusmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan, A. Dawes and J. Norris, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 6250 final of 3 September 2014 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39574 — Smart Card Chips) or, in the alternative, for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Infineon Technologies by subparagraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2014) 6250 final of 3 September 2014 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39574 — Smart Card Chips) at EUR 76 871 600;

2. Orders Infineon Technologies and the European Commission to bear their own costs, including those incurred in the original proceedings before the General Court in Case T-758/14, those incurred in the appeal proceedings in Case C-99/17 P and those incurred in the proceedings referred back to the General Court.

(1) OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.