ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 437/26

Judgment of the General Court of 7 November 2017 — Frame v EUIPO — Bianca-Moden (BIANCALUNA)

(Case T-627/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark BIANCALUNA - Earlier national figurative mark bianca - Procedural economy - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Identity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2017/C 437/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Frame Srl (San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Italy) (represented by: E. Montelione, M. Borghese and R. Giordano, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Bianca-Moden GmbH & Co. KG (Ochtrup, Germany) (represented by: P. Lange, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 August 2015 (Case R 2952/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Bianca-Moden and Frame.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Frame Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 22.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/30

Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2018 — PTC Therapeutics International v EMA

(Case T-718/15) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Document held by the EMA and submitted in the context of the application for marketing authorisation for the medicinal product Translarna - Decision to grant a third party access to the document - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - No general presumption of confidentiality))

(2018/C 104/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: PTC Therapeutics International Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented initially by: C. Thomas, Barrister, G. Castle, B. Kelly, H. Billson, Solicitors, and M. Demetriou QC, and, subsequently, by C. Thomas, M. Demetriou, G. Castle and B. Kelly)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by: T. Jabłoński, A. Spina, S. Marino, A. Rusanov and N. Rampal Olmedo, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: European Confederation of Pharmaceutical Entrepreneurs (Eucope) (represented by: D. Scannell, Barrister, and S. Cowlishaw, Solicitor)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Decision EMA/722323/2015 of the EMA of 25 November 2015, granting to a third party, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), access to a document containing information submitted in the context of an application for marketing authorisation for the medicinal product Translarna.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders PTC Therapeutics International Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), including those relating to the application for interim measures;

3. Orders the European Confederation of Pharmaceutical Entrepreneurs (Eucope) to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 59, 15.2.2016.
1.

Annuls Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/1119 of 22 June 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2015 L 182, p. 39) insofar as it made a financial correction based on non-compliance with the requirements of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 of 30 November 2009 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 as regards cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system, under the direct support schemes for farmers provided for that Regulation, as well as for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards cross-compliance under the support scheme provided for the wine sector as regards the controls carried out by Hungary to ensure compliance by farms with the obligations flowing from Articles 4 and 5 of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources;
Case T-104/15: Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2018 — KV v Commission (Grant agreements concluded in the context of the Lifelong Learning Programme (2007-2013) — ‘Green Business is Smart Business’ and ‘LadybizIT: Woman entrepreneurship on the verge of ICT’ projects — Ineligible costs — Action for annulment — Lack of jurisdiction of the Commission)

Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2018 — KV v Commission

(Case T-104/15) ( 1 )

‛(Grant agreements concluded in the context of the Lifelong Learning Programme (2007-2013) — ‘Green Business is Smart Business’ and ‘LadybizIT: Woman entrepreneurship on the verge of ICT’ projects — Ineligible costs — Action for annulment — Lack of jurisdiction of the Commission)’

Parties

Applicant: KV (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Gheorghiu and K. Skelly, and subsequently by C. Gheorghiu, I. Rubene and J. King, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) (represented initially by: H. Monet and D. Homann, and subsequently by H. Monet, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision C(2014) 9706 final of 16 December 2014, which dismissed as unfounded the appeal brought by the applicant against the decision of the EACEA of 23 September 2014 declaring certain staff costs to be ineligible in the light of the grant agreements concluded on 30 September 2010 and 9 September 2011 between the applicant and the EACEA for the implementation of the European projects ‘Green Business is Smart Business’ and ‘LadybizIT: Woman entrepreneurship on the Verge of ICT’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Implementing Decision C(2014) 9706 final of 16 December 2014;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action as inadmissible;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by KV;

4. Orders the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) to bear its own costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 155, 11.5.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 182/20

Judgment of the General Court of 10 April 2018 — Alcogroup and Alcodis v Commission

(Case T-274/15) (1)

((Action for annulment - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Markets in bioethanol and ethanol - Administrative procedure - Decision ordering an inspection - Commission’s powers of investigation - Professional privilege protecting communications between lawyers and their clients - Documents exchanged following a previous inspection - Commission’s refusal to suspend the infringement proceedings at issue - Measure not open to challenge - Inadmissibility))

(2018/C 182/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Alcogroup (Brussels, Belgium) and Alcodis (Brussels) (represented by: P. de Bandt, J. Dewispelaere and J. Probst, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Christoforou, C. Giolito, V. Bottka and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicants: Orde van Vlaamse Balies (Brussels) (represented by: initially, T. Bontinck and P. Goffinet, and subsequently by F. Wijckmans, S. Engelen and S. De Keer, lawyers), Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone (Brussels) (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and P. Goffinet, lawyers), and Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles (Brussels) (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme and P. Goffinet, lawyers)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision C(2015) 1769 final of 12 March 2015, addressed to Alcogroup and to all companies directly or indirectly controlled by it, including Alcodis, and relating to a procedure pursuant to Article 20(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (AT.40244 — Bioethanol) and the annulment of the Commission’s letter of 8 May 2015 addressed to Alcogroup in the context of the investigations AT.40244 — Bioethanol and AT.40054 — Oil and Biofuel Markets.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Orders Alcogroup and Alcodis to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures;

3. Orders the Orde van Vlaamse Balies, the Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone and the Ordre français des avocats du barreau de Bruxelles to bear their own respective costs incurred in the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2018 — Iran Insurance v Council

(Case T-558/15) (1)

((Non-contractual liability - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Iran - Freezing of funds - Inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures - Material damage - Non-material damage))

(2019/C 82/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Iran Insurance Company (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: D. Luff, lawyer)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Ronkes Agerbeek and R. Tricot, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 268 TFEU for compensation for the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant following the adoption of Council Decision 2010/644/CFSP of 25 October 2010 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 81), of Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1), of Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 71), of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation No 961/2010 (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 11), and of Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), by which the applicant’s name was included and maintained on the lists of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Iran Insurance Company to bear its 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 27, 25.1.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2018 — Nova v Commission

(Case T-299/15) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Grant agreement concluded in the context of the pilot project seeking to establish a network of contacts and discussions between municipalities on experiences and best practices in respect of the resettlement and integration of refugees - No objective assessment of the outcome of the project - Proportionality - Repayment of the sums paid - Measures of inquiry - Counterclaim))

(2018/C 445/18)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Nova Onlus Consorzio nazionale di cooperative sociali — Soc. coop. (Trani, Italy) (represented by: M. Astolfi and M. Petrucci, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, L. Di Paolo and L. Cappelletti, subsequently L. Di Paolo, and finally O. Verheecke and F. Moro, acting as Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

First, application based on Article 272 TFEU seeking, in essence, a declaration that the Commission is not justified in reclaiming from the applicant the sum of EUR 80 242,78 pursuant to the Grant Agreement HOME/2011/PPRS/AG/2176 and a direction requiring the Commission to pay EUR 52 146,36 plus default interest, and, second, counterclaim of the Commission seeking a direction requiring the applicant to repay the sum of EUR 80 242,78 plus default interest in performance of that Grant Agreement.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that the European Commission is not justified, pursuant to the Grant Agreement with the reference HOME/2011/PPRS/AG/2176, to reclaim from Nova Onlus Consorzio nazionale di cooperative sociali — Soc. coop. 15 % of the costs associated with the website of the Transnational Observatory for Refugees’ Resettlement in Europe project, namely EUR 3 002,45;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Nova Onlus Consorzio nazionale di cooperative sociali to pay to the Commission, pursuant to that agreement, the amount of EUR 77 240,33, increased by default interest at the rate of 3,55 % from 19 May 2015 until full payment of that amount is made;

4. Dismisses the counterclaim as to the remainder;

5. Orders Nova Onlus Consorzio nazionale di cooperative sociali to bear its own costs and to pay two thirds of those incurred by the Commission;

6. Orders the Commission to bear one third of its own costs.

(1) OJ C 254, 3.8.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — NeXovation v Commission

(Case T-353/15) (1)

(State aid - Individual aid in favour of the Nürburgring complex for the construction of a leisure park, hotels and restaurants as well as for the organisation of motor races - Decision finding the aid to be incompatible with the internal market - Decision finding that the reimbursement of the aid found to be incompatible does not concern the new owner of the Nürburgring complex - Action for annulment - No substantial effect on competitive position - Inadmissibility - Decision finding no State aid after the preliminary examination stage - Action for annulment - Interested party - Legal interest in bringing an action - Admissibility - Breach of procedural rights - No difficulties that would have required the initiation of a formal investigation procedure - Complaint - Sale of the assets of the beneficiaries of the State aid found to be incompatible - Open, transparent, non-discriminatory and unconditional tender process - Diligent and impartial examination - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 288/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: NeXovation, Inc. (Hendersonville, United States) (represented initially by A. von Bergwelt, F. Henkel and M. Nordmann, and subsequently by A. von Bergwelt and M. Nordmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by L. Flynn, T. Maxian Rusche and B. Stromsky, Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the partial annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2016/151 of 1 October 2014 on the State aid SA.31550 (2012/C) (ex 2012/NN) implemented by Germany for Nürburgring (OJ 2016 L 34, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders that the application for a decision that there is no need to adjudicate on the action be considered together with the substance of the case;

2. Orders that the application for a decision that there is no need to adjudicate on the action be dismissed;

3. Dismisses the action;

4. Orders NeXovation, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2019 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-135/15) (1)

(EAGF - Expenses excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Italy - Temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry - Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 - Regulation(EC) No 968/2006 - Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 - Time limit of 24 months - Concept of ‘multiannual measure’ - Conditions for granting restructuring aid - Concept of ‘production facility’ - Classification of silos - Concept of‘complete dismantling’ - Annex 2 to Document VI/5330/97 - Problems in interpreting EU legislation - Cooperation in good faith - Legitimate expectations - Ne bis in idem - Slaughter premiums - Information and promotion campaigns for agricultural products - Late payments - Evidence of the existence of specific management conditions - Equal treatment - Mistranslation in one of the language versions of an EU regulation - Whether the Member State is answerable for the financial correction)

(2019/C 148/37)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and C. Colelli, avvocato dello Stato)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, D. Bianchi, P Ondrůšek and I. Galindo Martín, acting as Agents, and subsequently, D. Bianchi and P Ondrůšek, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: French Republic (represented by: D. Colas and S Horrenberger, acting as Agents) and Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér and G. Koós, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/103 of 16 January 2015 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2015 L 16, p.33), in so far as it relates to certain expenditure incurred by the Italian Republic.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders the French Republic and Hungary to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 11.5.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2020 — IMG v Commission

(Case T-381/15 RENV) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Development cooperation - Implementation of the EU budget under indirect management - Decision suspending the applicant’s ability to conclude new delegation agreements for indirect management with the Commission - Unlawfulness - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals - Application for injunctive relief - Late submission of application - Modification of the nature of the reparation sought - Inadmissibility)

(2020/C 414/47)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: International Management Group (IMG) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and J.-Y. de Cara, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and J. Norris, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation in respect of the damage suffered by the applicant as a result of the Commission’s decision, in its letter of 8 May 2015, not to conclude new delegation agreements for indirect management with the applicant ‘until there was absolute certainty regarding [its] status as an international organisation’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action for damages;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs in respect of the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2019 — Silver Plastics and Johannes Reifenhäuser v Commission

(Case T-582/15) (1)

(Competition - Cartels - Retail food packaging market - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Evidence of involvement in a cartel - Single and continuous infringement - Principle of equality of arms - ‘Right to confront’ - 2006 Leniency Notice - Significant added value - Attributability of unlawful conduct - 2006 Guidelines for calculating the amount of fines - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Upper limit of the fine)

(2019/C 305/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Silver Plastics GmbH & Co. KG (Troisdorf, Germany) and Johannes Reifenhäuser Holding GmbH & Co. KG (Troisdorf) (represented initially by M. Wirtz, S. Möller and W. Carstensen, then by M. Wirtz, S. Möller and C. Karbaum, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by A. Biolan, G. Meessen, I. Zaloguin and L. Wildpanner, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking, principally, the annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2015) 4336 final of 24 June 2015 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39563 — Retail Food Packaging) and, in the alternative, the reduction of the fines imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Silver Plastics GmbH & Co. KG and Johannes Reifenhäuser Holding GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 16, 18.1.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 462/23

Judgment of the General Court of 27 October 2016 — Caffè Nero Group v EUIPO (CAFFÈ NERO)

(Case T-37/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark CAFFÈ NERO - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptiveness - Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 462/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Caffè Nero Group Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: L. Cassidy, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 November 2015 (Case R 954/2015-1), relating to the application for registration of the figurative sign CAFFÈ NERO as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Caffè Nero Group Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 106, 21.3.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/47

Judgment of the General Court of 16 February 2017 — DMC v EUIPO — Etike’ International (De Giusti ORGOGLIO)

(Case T-18/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark De Giusti ORGOGLIO - Earlier EU word mark ORGOGLIO - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 104/67)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: DMC Srl (San Vendemiano, Italy) (represented by: B. Osti, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Etike’ International Srl (Baronissi, Italy) (represented by: V. Fiorillo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 November 2015 (Case R 1764/2013-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Etike’ International and DMC.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders DMC Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 90, 7.3.2016.