ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2018 — Out of the blue v EUIPO — Dubois and MFunds USA (FUNNY BANDS)

(Case T-214/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark FUNNY BANDS - Absolute grounds for refusal - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2019/C 44/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Out of the blue KG (Lilienthal, Germany) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt, V. Töbelmann and A. Zarm, lawyers)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Frédéric Dubois (Lasne, Belgium), MFunds USA LLC (Miami Beach, Florida, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 January 2017 (Case R 1081/2016-2) concerning invalidity proceedings between Out of the blue, of the one part, and Frédéric Dubois and MFunds USA, of the other part.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 20 January 2017 (Case R 1081/2016-2), in so far as it dismissed the appeal against the decision of the Cancellation Division to reject the application for a declaration of invalidity of the EU word mark FUNNY BANDS for ‘precious metals and their alloys and goods in precious metals or coated therewith, not included in other classes; jewellery, jewellery; rings (jewellery); rings (jewellery); bracelets (jewellery); necklaces (jewellery); novelty key rings’ in Class 14, ‘rubber, gutta-percha, gum and products made of those materials, not included in other classes; flexible pipes, not of metal; rubber rings; unworked or semi-worked rubber; cords of rubber’ in Class 17 and ‘services of wholesale and retail of precious metals and their alloys and goods in precious metals or coated therewith, jewellery, rings (jewellery), rings (jewellery), bracelets (jewellery), necklaces (jewellery), rubber, gutta-percha, gum and goods made from these materials, flexible pipes, not of metal’ in Class 35;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2018 — UC v Parliament

(Case T-572/17) (1)

((Staff case - Officials - Promotion - 2015 promotion round - Staff report - Award of merit points - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Manifest error of assessment - Liability - Non-material damage))

(2019/C 93/66)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: UC (represented by: A. Tymen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Steele and J. Van Pottelberge, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the applicant's staff report for 2015, of the decision to award him two merit points for that year and of the decision to reject his complaint and, secondly, compensation for the non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders UC to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 369, 30.10.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2018 — Azarov v Council

(Case T-247/17) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and of economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Right to property - Right to pursue an economic activity - Manifest error of assessment))

(2019/C 82/57)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: G. Lansky and A. Egger, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and F. Naert, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/381 of 3 March 2017 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2017 L 58, p. 34), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/374 of 3 March 2017 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2017 L 58, p. 1), in so far as the applicant’s name has been maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies covered by those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Mykola Yanovych Azarov to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2019 — Eglo Leuchten v EUIPO — Briloner Leuchten (Lamp)

(Case T-767/17) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a light fitting - Ground for invalidity - Earlier design - Individual character - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

(2019/C 103/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Eglo Leuchten GmbH (Pill, Austria) (represented by H. Lauf, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Briloner Leuchten GmbH & Co. KG, formerly Briloner Leuchten GmbH (Brilon, Germany) (represented by M.-H. Hoffmann, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 September 2017(Case R 746/2016-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Eglo Leuchten and Briloner Leuchten

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Eglo Leuchten GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 22, 22.1.18.
1.

Orders the European Commission to pay to Ethniko Kentro Erevnas kai Technologikis Anaptyxis (EKETA), first, the sum of EUR 19 522,57 corresponding to eligible staff costs, plus related indirect costs and delayed interest on that sum at the rate of 3,50 % from 12 May 2017 until full payment of that sum, second, delayed interest on the sum of EUR 2 950 at the rate of 3,50 % calculated from 12 May 2017 until 28 November 2017 and, third, delayed interest on the sum of EUR 8 988,21 at the rate of 3,50 % calculated from 12 May 2017 until the payment of that sum on 2 October 2017;
Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2019 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-237/17) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Spain - Criterion for the recognition of a producer organization - Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 - Financial correction)

(2019/C 155/47)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: initially A. Gavela Llopis, M.A. Sampol Pucurull and S. Jiménez García, then M.A. Sampol Pucurull and S. Jiménez García, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and I. Galindo Martín, Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/264 of 14 February 2017 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 2017 L 39, p. 12), in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls, inasmuch as it applies a flat-rate correction of 10 %, Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/264 of 14 February 2017 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 2017 L 39, p. 12), in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Declares that the Kingdom of Spain and the European Commission are to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 202, 26.6.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2019 — TV v Council

(Case T-453/17) (1)

(Civil service - Probationary officials - Probationary period - Probation report - Opinion of the Reports Committee - Dismissal at the end of the probationary period - Work not adequate - Article 34 of the Staff Regulations - Manifest error of assessment - Duty to state reasons)

(2019/C 122/18)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: TV (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking first, the annulment of the decision of the Council of 19 August 2016 dismissing the applicant at the end of his probationary period and the decision of the Council of 11 April 2017 rejecting the applicant’s complaint and, secondly, compensation for the non-material damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders TV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Inditex v EUIPO — Ansell (ZARA TANZANIA ADVETURES)

(Case T-655/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark ZARA TANZANIA ADVENTURES - Earlier EU word marks ZARA - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade marks - Detriment to the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade marks)

(2019/C 187/77)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) (Arteixo, Spain) (represented by: G. Marín Raigal, G. Macías Bonilla, P. López Ronda and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Zainab Ansell and Roger Ansell (Moshi, Tanzania)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 July 2017 (Joined Cases R 2330/2011-2 and R 2369/2011 2), relating to opposition proceedings between Industria de Diseño Textil, on the one hand, and Mrs Ansell and Mr Ansell, on the other hand.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 5 July 2017 (Joined Cases R 2330/2011-2 and R 2369/2011-2) in so far as the Board of Appeal partially upheld the appeal brought by Mrs Ansell and Mr Ansell (Case R 2369/2011-2) and allowed the mark applied for to proceed to registration in respect of the services which are listed in point 3 of the operative part of that decision and are in Classes 39 and 43 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;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) in the course of the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 402, 27.11.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2019 — Robert Bosch v EUIPO (Simply. Connected.)

(Cases T-251/17 and T-252/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Applications for the EU figurative marks Simply. Connected. - Relative ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Scope of the examination which has to be carried out by the Board of Appeal - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 64 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 71 of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2019/C 172/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Robert Bosch GmbH (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: S. Völker and M. Pemsel, lawyers)

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

Re:

Actions brought against the decisions of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 March 2017 (Case R 948/2016-5) and 10 March 2017 (Case R 947/2016-5), regarding applications for registration of the figurative signs Simply. Connected. as EU trade marks

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-251/17 and T-252/17 for the purposes of the judgment;

2. Dismisses the actions;

3. Orders Robert Bosch GmbH to pay the costs.

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

Judgment of the General Court of 14 May 2019 — Moreira v EUIPO — Da Silva Santos Júnior (NEYMAR)

(Case T-795/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark NEYMAR - Declaration of invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 230/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Carlos Moreira (Guimarães, Portugal) (represented by: T. Soares Faria, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Neymar Da Silva Santos Júnior (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: initially T. de Haan, H. Abraham and P. Péters, subsequently by T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 September 2017 (Case R 80/2017-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Mr Da Silva Santos Júnior and Mr Moreira.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Carlos Moreira to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 63, 19.2.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 11 April 2019 — Adapta Color v EUIPO — Coatings Foreign IP (Rustproof System ADAPTA)

(Case T-226/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union word mark Rustproof system ADAPTA - Partial declaration of invalidity by the Board of Appeal - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2007/1001) - No distinctive character acquired by use - Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Infringement of the right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001) - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court)

(2019/C 206/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Adapta Color, SL (Peñiscola, Spain) (represented by: G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Coatings Foreign IP Co. LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: A. Rajendra, Solicitor, and by S. Malynicz QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2017 (Case R 2408/2015-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Coatings Foreign IP and Adapta Color.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Adapta Color, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 202, 26.6.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2019 — EIB v Syria

(Case T-591/17) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Water Supply Deir Ez Zor Region Loan Agreement No 80310 - Non-performance of the agreement - Repayment of the sums advanced - Default interest - Procedure by default)

(2019/C 280/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Investment Bank (represented by: initially by P. Chamberlain, T. Gilliams, F. Oxangoiti Briones and J. Shirran, and subsequently by F. Oxangoiti Briones, J. Klein and J. Shirran, acting as Agents, and D. Arts, lawyer, and T. Cusworth, Solicitor)

Defendant: Syrian Arab Republic

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 272 TFEU, seeking an order that the Syrian Arab Republic repay sums due under Water Supply Deir Ez Zor Region Loan Agreement No 80310, plus default interest.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the Syrian Arab Republic to repay the European Union, represented by the European Investment Bank (EIB), the sum of EUR 404 425,58;

2. Declares that that sum is to bear default interest, on the principle amounts and on the contractual interest, at the annual rate of 3.5%, from 25 August 2017 until the date that payment is made;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders the Syrian Arab Republic to pay the costs

(1) OJ C 369, 30.10.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2019 — EIB v Syria

(Case T-541/17) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Electricity Transmission Project Loan Agreement No 20868 - Non-performance of the agreement - Repayment of the sums advanced - Default interest - Procedure by default)

(2019/C 255/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Investment Bank (represented initially by P. Chamberlain, T. Gilliams, F. Oxangoiti Briones and J. Shirran, and subsequently by F. Oxangoiti Briones, J. Klein and J. Shirran, acting as Agents, and D. Arts, lawyer, and T. Cusworth, Solicitor)

Defendant: Syrian Arab Republic

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 272 TFEU, seeking an order that the Syrian Arab Republic repay sums due under Electricity Transmission Project Loan Agreement No 20868, plus default interest.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the Syrian Arab Republic to repay the European Union, represented by the European Investment Bank (EIB) the sums of EUR 38 934 400,51 and 3 383 971,66 Swiss francs (CHF);

2. Declares that those sums are to bear default interest, in accordance with the method laid down in Article 3.02 of Electricity Transmission Project loan agreement No 20868, entered into by the EIB and the Syrian Arab Republic on 14 December 2000 and amended on 20 December 2004, on the principal amounts and on the contractual interest, from 9 August 2017 up to the date that payment is made;

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

4. Orders the Syrian Arab Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 369, 30.10.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2019 — STIF-IDF v Commission

(Case T-738/17) (1)

(State aid - Aid scheme unlawfully implemented by France between 1994 and 2008 - Investment subsidies awarded by the STIF-IDF - Decision declaring the aid scheme compatible with the internal market - Advantage - Offsetting of costs involved in the discharging of public service obligations - Article 107(1), TFEU - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 328/49)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Syndicat Transport Île de France (STIF-IDF) (Paris, France) (represented by: B. Le Bret and C. Rydzynski, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Armati, C. Georgieva-Kecsmar and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment in part of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1470 of 2 February 2017 on State aid schemes SA.26763 2014/C (ex 2012/NN) implemented by France in favour of bus transport undertakings in the Île-de-France Region (OJ 2017 L 209, p. 24).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application.

2. Orders Syndicat Transport Île de France (STIF-IDF) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 22, 22.1.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 June 2019 — a&o hostel and hotel Berlin v Commission

(Case T-578/17) (1)

(State aid - Operating aid - Youth hostel in Berlin - Rent-free use of a publicly owned property - Decision declaring the potential aid compatible with the internal market - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - Serious difficulties)

(2019/C 295/27)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: a&o hostel and hotel Berlin GmbH, successor in title to A & O Hotel and Hostel Friedrichshain GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: S. Heise and M. Lindner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck, A Bouchagiar and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented initially by T. Henze and R. Kanitz, acting as Agents, and subsequently by R. Kanitz, acting as Agent, and K. Dingemann, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 3220 final of 29 May 2017 on State aid SA.43145 (2016/FC) — Germany, concerning the allegedly unlawful non-fiscal State aid granted to Jugendherberge Berlin Ostkreuz gGmbH, a summary of which was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJ 2017 C 193, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision C(2017) 3220 final of 29 May 2017 on State aid SA.43145 (2016/FC) — Germany, concerning the allegedly unlawful non-fiscal State aid granted to Jugendherberge Berlin Ostkreuz gGmbH;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by a&o hostel and hotel Berlin GmbH;

3. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 338, 9.10.2017.