ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 112/31

Judgment of the General Court of 6 March 2014 — Anapurna v OHIM — Annapurna (ANNAPURNA)

(Case T-71/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Community word mark ANNAPURNA - Application for annulment filed by the intervener - Article 134(1) to (3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Form of use of the trade mark - Proof of use for the registered goods))

2014/C 112/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Anapurna GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: P. Ehrlinger and T. Hagen, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Annapurna SpA (Prato, Italy) (represented by: S. Verea, K. Muraro and M. Balestriero, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 December 2012 (Case R 2409/2011 5), relating to revocation proceedings between Anapurna GmbH and Annapurna SpA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Rejects Annapurna SpA’s application for annulment;

3. Orders Anapurna GmbH to pay the costs, with the exception of those incurred by Annapurna SpA;

4. Orders Annapurna SpA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 292/42

Judgment of the General Court of 10 July 2014 — Moallem Insurance v Council

(Case T-182/13) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment))

2014/C 292/51

Language of the case: English

Parties

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

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

Re:

Application for, first, annulment of (i) Council Decision 2012/829/CFSP of 21 December 2012 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 356, p. 71), in that it listed the applicant 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 (ii) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1264/2012 of 21 December 2012 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 356, p. 55), in that it listed the applicant 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) and, secondly, a declaration of the inapplicability to the applicant of Article 12 of Decision 2010/43 and Article 35 of Regulation No 267/2012

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision 2012/829/CFSP of 21 December 2012, amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran, in so far as it listed Moallem Insurance Co. 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;

2. Annuls Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1264/2012 of 21 December 2012 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran, in so far as it listed Moallem Insurance Co. 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;

3. Orders the effects of Decision 2012/829 and Implementing Regulation No 1264/2012 to be maintained as regards Moallem Insurance Co. until the date of expiry of the period for bringing an appeal stated in the first paragraph of Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union or, if an appeal has been brought within that period, until the dismissal of the appeal

4. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Moallem Insurance Co..

(1) OJ C 164, 8.6.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/33

Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2014 — Zanjani v Council

(Case T-155/13) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Restrictions on admission - Action for annulment - Period allowed for commencing proceedings - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment - Adjustment of the temporal effects of annulment))

2014/C 282/43

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Babak Zanjani (Dubai, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: L. Defalque and C. Malherbe, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application for, first, annulment of (i) Council Decision 2012/829/CFSP of 21 December 2012, amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 356, p. 71), in that the applicant was listed 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 (ii) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1264/2012 of 21 December 2012 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 356, p. 55), in that the applicant was listed 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) and, secondly, a declaration of the inapplicability of Decision 2012/829 and Implementing Regulation No 1264/2012 in so far as Article 19(1)(b) and (c) of Decision 2010/413 is applied to him.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Annuls Council Decision 2012/829/CFSP of 21 December 2012 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran, in so far as it listed Mr Babak Zanjani 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;

2) Annuls Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1264/2012 of 21 December 2012 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran, in so far as it listed Mr Babak Zanjani 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;

3) Orders the effects of Decision 2012/829 and Implementing Regulation No 1264/2012 to be maintained as regards Mr Babak Zanjani until the date of expiry of the period for bringing an appeal stated in the first paragraph of Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union or, if an appeal has been brought within that period, until the dismissal of the appeal;

4) Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

5) Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Mr Babak Zanjani.

(1) OJ C 141, 18.5.2013.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 September 2014 — Grazyte v Commission

(Case T-86/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Temporary agents - Remuneration - Expatriation allowance - Condition set out in Article 4(1)(b) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Ten-year reference period - Duties in the service of an international organisation))

(2014/C 395/52)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Diana Grazyte (Utena, Lithuania) (represented by: R. Guarino, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented initially by V. Joris and subsequently by J. Currall and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 5 December 2012 in Case F-76/11 Grazyte v Commission, ECR-SC, EU:F:2012:173, seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part

1) The appeal is dismissed.

2) Ms Diana Grazyte shall bear her own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission in the present appeal proceedings.

(1) OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 388/14

Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2014 — Polo/Lauren v OHIM — FreshSide (Representation of a boy on a bicycle holding a mallet)

(Case T-265/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark representing a boy on a bicycle holding a mallet - Earlier Community and national figurative marks representing a polo player - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))

2014/C 388/17

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Polo/Lauren Company, LP (New York, United States) (represented by: S. Davies, Solicitor, J. Hill, Barrister, and R. Black, Solicitor)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: FreshSide Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: N. Lockett, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 March 2013 (Case R 15/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between The Polo/Lauren Company, LP and FreshSide Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 1 March 2013 (Case R 15/2012-2);

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by The Polo/Lauren Company, LP;

3. Orders FreshSide Ltd to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/34

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2014 — Photo USA Electronic Graphic v Council

(Case T-394/13) (1)

((Dumping - Imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in China - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Definition of the product concerned))

(2015/C 007/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Photo USA Electronic Graphic, Inc. (Beijing, China) (represented by: K. Adamantopoulos, lawyer)

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

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland and M. França, Agents); Ancàp SpA (Sommacampagna, Italy); Cerame-Unie AISBL (Brussels, Belgium); Confindustria Ceramica (Sassuolo, Italy); and Verband der Keramischen Industrie eV (Selb, Germany) (represented by: R. Bierwagen, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 412/2013 of 13 May 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 131, p. 1) in so far as it imposes an anti-dumping duty on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Photo USA Electronic Graphic, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union and by Ancàp SpA, Cerame-Unie AISBL, Confindustria Ceramica and Verband der Keramischen Industrie eV;

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

(1) OJ C 274, 21.9.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 421/39

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2014 — Larrañaga Otaño v OHIM (GRAPHENE)

(Case T-458/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark GRAPHENE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 421/54

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicants: Joseba Larrañaga Otaño (San Sebastián, Spain) and Mikel Larrañaga Otaño (San Sebastián) (represented by: F. Bueno Salamero, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 June 2013 (Case R 208/2013-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign GRAPHENE as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Joseba Larrañaga Otaño and Mikel Larrañaga Otaño to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 313, 26.10.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 34/34

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2014 — Netherlands Maritime Technology Association v Commission

(Case T-140/13) (1)

((State aid - Spanish scheme of early depreciation of certain assets acquired through financial leasing - Decision finding no State aid - Formal investigation procedure not initiated - Serious difficulties - Circumstances and length of the preliminary examination - Insufficient and incomplete examination))

(2015/C 034/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Netherlands Maritime Technology Association, formerly Scheepsbouw Nederland (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: K. Struckmann, lawyer, and G. Forwood, Barrister)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Afonso, L. Flynn and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by N. Díaz Abad and A. Sampol Pucurull, abogados del Estado)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission Decision of 20 November 2012 relating to State aid SA 34736 (12/N) concerning the implementation by the Kingdom of Spain of a tax scheme permitting the early depreciation of certain assets acquired through financial leasing.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action as being unfounded;

2) Orders Netherlands Maritime Technology Association to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3) Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 147, 25.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 26/26

Judgment of the General Court of 3 December 2014 — Max Mara Fashion Group v OHIM — Mackays Stores (M&Co.)

(Case T-272/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark M&Co. - Earlier Community and national figurative marks MAX&Co. - Earlier national word mark MAX&CO. - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 026/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Max Mara Fashion Group Srl (Turin, Italy) (represented by: F. Terrano, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Mackays Stores Ltd (Renfrew, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Gould and K. Passmore, Solicitors, J. Baldwin, Barrister, and M. Howe QC)

Re:

Action for the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 March 2013 (Case R 1199/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Max Mara Fashion Group Srl and Mackays Stores Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Max Mara Fashion Group Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2015 — Aic v OHIM — ACV Manufacturing (Heat exchangers)

(Case T-615/13) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a heat exchanger - Ground for invalidity - Lack of visibility of part of a complex product - Article 4(2) and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2015/C 073/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aic S.A. (Gdynia, Poland) (represented by: J. Radłowski, Legal Adviser)

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: ACV Manufacturing (Seneffe, Belgium)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 September 2013 (Case R 291/2012-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between ACV Manufacturing and Aic S.A.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Aic S.A. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 46/46

Judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2014 — Heli-Flight v EASA

(Case T-102/13) (1)

((Civil aviation - Application for approval of flight conditions for a Robinson R66 helicopter - Rejection decision of the EASA - Action for annulment - Scope of the Board of Appeal’s review - Scope of the Court’s review - Action for failure to act - Non-contractual liability))

(2015/C 046/56)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Heli-Flight GmbH & Co. KG (Reichelsheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Kittner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (represented by: T. Masing and C. Eckart, lawyers)

Re:

First, application for annulment of the decision of the EASA of 13 January 2012 rejecting the applicant’s application for approval of flight conditions submitted for a Robinson R66 helicopter (serial number 0034); secondly, application for a declaration that the EASA failed to act concerning the processing of the applicant’s applications of 11 July 2011 and 10 January 2012 concerning that helicopter and, thirdly, claim that the EASA should make good the damage that the applicant considers it has suffered because of that rejection decision and that alleged failure to act.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Heli-Flight GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 123, 27.4.2013.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2015 — Compagnie des montres Longines, Francillon v OHIM — Staccata (QUARTODIMIGLIO QM)

(Case T-76/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark QUARTODIMIGLIO QM - Earlier Community and international figurative marks representing two extended wings and earlier international figurative marks LONGINES - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 107/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Compagnie des montres Longines, Francillon SA (Saint-Imier, Switzerland) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, 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: Staccata Srl (Como, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2012 (Case R 62/2012-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Compagnie des montres Longines, Francillon SA and Staccata Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Compagnie des montres Longines, Francillon SA, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 108, 13.4.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 89/21

Judgment of the General Court of 29 January 2015 — Blackrock v OHIM (SO WHAT DO I DO WITH MY MONEY)

(Case T-609/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark SO WHAT DO I DO WITH MY MONEY - Mark consisting of an advertising slogan - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 089/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Blackrock, Inc. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, and K. Gilbert and M. Blair, Solicitors)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially I. Harrington, and subsequently J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 September 2013 (Case R 572/2013-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign SO WHAT DO I DO WITH MY MONEY as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Blackrock, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 155/25

Judgment of the General Court of 26 March 2015 — Radecki v OHIM — Vamed (AKTIVAMED)

(Case T-551/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark AKTIVAMED - Earlier national figurative mark VAMED - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 155/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Michael Radecki (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: C. Menebröcker and V. Töbelmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially A. Pohlmann then S. Hanne, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Vamed AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: R. Paulitsch, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 July 2013 (Case R 365/2012-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Vamed AG and Michael Radecki.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Michael Radecki to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 367, 14.12.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 127/23

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2015 — EESC v Achab

(Case T-430/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Remuneration - Expatriation allowance - Naturalisation - Article 4(1)(a) and (b) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Recovery of overpayments - Paragraph 2 of Article 85 of the Staff Regulations))

(2015/C 127/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (represented initially by M. Arsène, subsequently by M. Pascua Mateo and L. Camarena Januzec, acting as Agents, and D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: Mohammed Achab (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 26 June 2013 in Achab v EESC (F-21/12, ECR-SC, EU:F:2013:95), seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Mr Mohammed Achab in the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 325, 9.11.2013.