ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 366/33

Judgment of the General Court of 9 October 2012 — Bial-Portela v OHIM — Isdin (ZEBEXIR)

(Case T-366/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ZEBEXIR - Earlier Community word mark ZEBINIX - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 366/64

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bial-Portela & C a , SA (São Mamede do Coronado, Portugal) (represented by: B. Braga da Cruz and J.M. Conceição Pimenta, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Geroulakos, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Isdin, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: P. López Ronda, G. Macias Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and H.L. Curtis-Oliver, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1212/2009-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Bial-Portela & Ca, SA and Isdin, SA

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1212/2009-1);

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those of Bial-Portela & Ca, SA;

3. Orders Isdin, SA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.9.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 319/8

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2012 — Sogepi Consulting y Publicidad v OHIM (ESPETEC)

(Case T-72/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark ESPETEC - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive nature - Lack of distinctiveness - Lack of distinctiveness acquired by use - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 319/13

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Sogepi Consulting y Publicidad, SL (Vic, Spain) (represented by: initially by: J. de Oliveira Vaz Miranda Sousa, T. Barceló Rebaque and N. Esteve Manasanch, and subsequently by: J. de Oliveira Vaz Miranda Sousa and N. Esteve Manasanch)

Defendant: OHIM (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 November 2010 (Case R 312/2010-2) concerning an application for registration of the word mark ESPETEC as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sogepi Consulting y Publicidad, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 113, 9.4.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/19

Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2012 — pelicantravel.com v OHIM — Pelikan (pelican)

(Case T-136/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark pelikan - Absolute ground for refusal - No bad faith on the part of the applicant - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 38/31

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: pelicantravel.com s.r.o. (Bratislava, Slovakia) (represented by: M. Chlipala, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG (Hanover, Germany) (represented by: A. Nordemann, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 December 2010 (Case R 1428/2009-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between pelicantravel.com s.r.o. and Pelikan Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders pelicantravel.com s.r.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 7.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 9/36

Judgment of the General Court of 20 November 2012 — Phonebook of the World v OHIM — Seat Pagine Gialle (PAGINE GIALLE)

(Case T-589/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark PAGINE GIALLE - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - Lack of descriptive character - No signs or indications which have become customary - Article 7(1)(b) to (d) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009)

2013/C 9/64

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Phonebook of the World (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Bertrand, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Seat Pagine Gialle SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: F. Jacobacci, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 August 2011 (Case R 1541/2010-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Phonebook of the World and Seat Pagine Gialle SpA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Phonebook of the World to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 32, 4.2.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 79/14

Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2013 — Marszałkowski v OHIM — Mar-Ko Fleischwaren (WALICHNOWY MARKO)

(Case T-159/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark WALICHNOWY MARKO - Earlier Community word mark MAR-KO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 79/24

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Marek Marszałkowski (Sokolniki, Poland) (represented by: C. Sadkowski, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: K. Zajfert and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co. KG (Blankenheim, Germany) (represented by: O. Ruhl, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 January 2011 (Case R 760/2010-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mar-Ko Fleischwaren GmbH & Co. KG and Mr Marek Marszałkowski.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Marek Marszałkowski to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 55/11

Judgment of the General Court of 15 January 2013 — Gigabyte Technology v OHIM — Haskins (Gigabyte)

(Case T-451/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Gigabyte - Earlier Community word mark GIGABITER - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 55/18

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd (Taipei, Taiwan) (represented by: F. Schwerbrock, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Robert A. Haskins (Quakertown, Pennsylvania, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 May 2011 (Case R 2047/2010-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Robert A. Haskins and Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 298, 8.10.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 147/18

Judgment of the General Court of 10 April 2013 — Fercal — Consultadoria e Serviços v OHIM — Parfums Rochas (PATRIZIA ROCHA)

(Case T-360/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark PATRIZIA ROCHA - Earlier national word mark ROCHAS - Refusal to register by the Opposition Division - Inadmissibility of the action brought before the Board of Appeal - Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 147/31

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Fercal — Consultadoria e Serviços, Lda (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: A. J. Rodrigues, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Parfums Rochas SAS (Paris, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 April 2011 (Case R 2355/2010-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Parfums Rochas SAS and Fercal — Consultadoria e Serviços, Lda

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Fercal — Consultadoria e Serviços, Lda to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 298, 8.10.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 79/17

Judgment of the General Court of 6 February 2013 — Maharishi Foundation v OHIM (MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE)

(Case T-426/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE - Absolute grounds for refusal - Decision of the Board of Appeal remitting the case to the Examination Division - Article 65(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Admissibility - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Relevant public)

2013/C 79/30

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Maharishi Foundation Ltd (Saint-Hélier, Jersey) (represented by: A. Meijboom, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1294/2010-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign MÉDITATION TRANSCENDANTALE as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Maharishi Foundation Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 171/26

Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2013 — Alumina v Council

(Case T-304/11) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of zeolite A powder originating in Bosnia and Herzegovina - Normal value - Representativeness of domestic sales - Profit margin - Ordinary course of trade)

2013/C 171/51

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alumina d.o.o. (Zvornik, Bosnia and Herzegovina) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis and B. Servais, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, acting as Agent, assisted by G. Berrisch and A. Polcyn, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 464/2011 of 11 May 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of zeolite A powder originating in Bosnia and Herzegovina (OJ 2011 L 125, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 464/2011 of 11 May 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of zeolite A powder originating in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in so far as it concerns Alumina d.o.o.;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Alumina;

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

(1) OJ C 226, 30.7.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 123/16

Judgment of the General Court of 13 March 2013 — Inglewood and Others v Parliament

(Joined Cases T-229/11 and T-276/11) (1)

(Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Additional pension scheme - Decisions rejecting applications seeking to benefit from the provisions in force before the amendment to the additional pension scheme in 2009 - Plea of illegality - Acquired rights - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Equal treatment)

2013/C 123/27

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Lord Inglewood (Penrith, United Kingdom), and the other 10 applicants whose names are set out in the Annex to the judgment (Case T-229/11); and Marie-Arlette Carlotti (Marseilles, France) (Case T-276/11) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal and D. Abreu Caldas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Lorenz, M. Windisch and K. Pocheć, acting as Agents)

Re:

Applications for annulment of the European Parliament’s decisions refusing to grant the applicants their voluntary additional pension early, at the age of 60 or in part in the form of a lump sum

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders Lord Inglewood and the other 10 applicants whose names are set out in the Annex, as well as Ms Marie-Arlette Carlotti, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 16.7.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 225/72

Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2013 — i-content v OHIM — Decathlon (BETWIN)

(Case T-514/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark BETWIN - Earlier Community figurative mark b’Twin - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 225/158

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: i-content Ltd Zweigniederlassung Deutschland (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Nordemann, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Decathlon SA (Villeneuve-d’Ascq, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 June 2011 (Case R 1816/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Decathlon SA and i-content Ltd Zweigniederlassung Deutschland.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 June 2011 (Case R 1816/2010-1) so far as concerns the goods in Class 28 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, corresponding to the following description: ‘inflatable swimming pools for recreational use; jungle gyms (play equipment); stuffed plush animals; swimming pools [toys]; air pistols [toys], hand-held electronic video games; toy vehicles; toy models; electronic hand-held game units; counters for games; checkers [games]; playground apparatus; mechanical action toys; playthings, except playthings for pets; electronic games; toy balloons; dice; novelties for parties, dances (party favours); hand-held electronic games; game cards; pinball-type games; cups for dice; printing toys; question sets for board games; bingo card; model aircraft; skittles; dominoes; decorative wind socks; pinball machines; skill and action games; parlour games; slot machines, automatic; pinball machines (coin or non-coin operated); scale model aeroplanes; card games; flying disks; playing balls; games; cups for dice; dolls; skittles (games); remote-control vehicles (toys); quoits; darts; clay pigeon traps; scale-model vehicles; sledges; slot machines, automatic; chess; toy masks; puzzles; stuffed toys; hand-held computer games; darts; toy aircraft; tossing disc toys; clay pigeons (targets); tappets; teddy bears; hand-held video games; electronically-operated toy motor vehicles; battery operated toys; gaming chips; targets; stuffed toy bears; inflatable toys; board games; swings; kites; model cars’;

2. So far as concerns the goods mentioned in Article 1, annuls the Opposition Division’s decision of 21 July 2010 and rejects the opposition;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 3.12.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 189/21

Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2013 — Sanofi Pasteur MSD v OHIM — Mundipharma (Representation of two devices of crossing sickles)

(Case T-502/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark representing two devices of crossing sickles - Earlier national and international figurative marks representing two devices of ribbons - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009)

2013/C 189/41

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Sanofi Pasteur MSD SNC (Lyon, France) (represented by: T. de Haan, P. Péters and V. Wellens, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Mundipharma AG (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: F. Nielsen, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 July 2011 (Case R 1904/2010-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Sanofi Pasteur MSD SNC and Mundipharma AG

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sanofi Pasteur MSD SNC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.
1.

Annuls the following measures in so far as they concern Bank Refah Kargaran: — Annex II to Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision 2010/644/CFSP of 25 October 2010, and subsequently by Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011; — Decision 2010/644; — Annex VIII to Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007, as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation No 961/2010; — Decision 2011/783; — Implementing Regulation No 1245/2011; — Annex IX to Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation No 961/2010;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 225/68

Judgment of the General Court of 28 May 2013 — Chiboub v Council

(Case T-188/11) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia - Freezing of funds - No legal basis)

2013/C 225/151

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mohamed Slim Ben Mohamed Hassen Ben Salah Chiboub (Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: initially, G. Perrot and F. Gaudillière, and subsequently by M.-M. Le Roux, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: initially, A. Vitro, G. Étienne and S. Cook, and subsequently by A. Vitro and G. Étienne, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bordes and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents); and Republic of Tunisia (represented by: W. Bourdon, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment, first, of Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP of 31 January 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2011 L 28, p. 62); secondly, of Council Implementing Decision 2011/79/CFSP of 4 February 2011 implementing Decision 2011/72 (OJ 2011 L 31, p. 40); and, thirdly, of Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 of 4 February 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2011 L 31, p. 1), in so far as those measures apply to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the Annex to Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP of 31 January 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia, as amended by Council Implementing Decision 2011/79/CFSP of 4 February 2011 implementing Decision 2011/72, in so far as it applies to Mr Mohamed Slim Ben Mohamed Hassen Ben Salah Chiboub;

2. Annuls Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 of 4 February 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia in so far as it applies to Mr Chiboub;

3. Declares that the effects of the Annex to Decision 2011/72, as amended by Implementing Decision 2011/79, with respect to Mr Chiboub shall be maintained until the annulment of Regulation No 101/2011 takes effect in so far as it applies to Mr Chiboub;

4. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Chiboub;

5. Orders the European Commission and the Republic of Tunisia to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 145, 14.5.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 325/32

Judgment of the General Court of 16 September 2013 — Netherlands v Commission

(Case T-343/11) (1)

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - Expenditure excluded from financing - Fruits and vegetables - Exclusion of financing of costs of printing on packaging - Non-compliance with criteria for recognising a producers’ organisation - Exclusion of expenses of all members of the producers’ organisation in question - Proportionality)

2013/C 325/53

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels, M. de Ree, B. Koopman and C. Schillemans, subsequently by C. Wissels, M. de Ree and C. Schillemans, acting as Agents)

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

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2011/244/EU of 15 April 2011 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2011 L 102, p. 33) in so far as it concerns certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 252, 27.8.2011.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 313/24

Judgment of the General Court of 12 September 2013 — ‘Rauscher’ Consumer Products v OHIM (Representation of a tampon)

(Case T-492/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for a figurative Community trade mark representing a sanitary tampon - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 207/2009)

2013/C 313/47

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant:‘Rauscher’ Consumer Products GmbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: M. Stütz, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 July 2011 (Case R 2168/2010-1) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a sanitary tampon as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ‘Rauscher’ Consumer Products GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 3.12.2011.