ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/26

Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2015 — Société des produits Nestlé v OHIM — Terapia (ALETE)

(Case T-544/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ALETE - Earlier national word mark ALETA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Suspension of the administrative proceedings - Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

(2016/C 007/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, A. Lambrecht and S. Cobet-Nüse, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Terapia SA (Cluj Napoca, Romania)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 May 2014 (Case R 1128/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Terapia SA and Société des produits Nestlé SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 19 May 2014 (Case R 1128/2013-4);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Société des produits Nestlé.

(1) OJ C 339, 29.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 414/30

Judgment of the General Court of 22 October 2015 — Volkswagen v OHIM (CHOICE)

(Case T-431/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark CHOICE - 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 414/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: U. Sander, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 April 2014 (Case R 2019/2013-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign CHOICE as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Volkswagen AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/53

Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2015 — Hong Kong Group v OHIM — WE Brand (W E)

(Case T-718/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a Community figurative mark W E - Earlier Community word mark WE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 027/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hong Kong Group Oy (Vantaa, Finland) (represented by: J.-H. Spåre, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: WE Brand Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: R. van Oerle and E. de Groot, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 August 2014 (Case R 2305/2013-2) concerning opposition proceedings between WE Brand Sàrl and Hong Kong Group Oy.

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 4 August 2014 (Case R 2305/2013-2) concerning opposition proceedings between WE Brand Sàrl and Hong Kong Group Oy and the decision of the Opposition Division of OHIM of 30 September 2013;

2. Rejects the opposition;

3. Orders OHIM and WE Brand to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by Hong Kong Group, including those necessarily incurred by Hong Kong Group for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM.

(1) OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 16/32

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2015 — Masafi v OHIM — Hd1 (masafi)

(Case T-249/14) (1)

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

(2016/C 016/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Masafi Co. LLC (Dubai, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: G. Hinarejos Mulliez, lawyer)

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: Hd1 Ltd (Huddersfield, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 February 2014 (Case R 1131/2013-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Hd1 Limited and Masafi Co. LLC.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Masafi Co. LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

(1) OJ C 235, 21.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 48/47

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — CareAbout v OHIM — Florido Rodríguez (Kerashot)

(Case T-356/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark Kerashot - Earlier national figurative mark K KERASOL - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Partial refusal of registration by the Board of Appeal))

(2016/C 048/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: CareAbout GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: P. Mes, C. Graf von der Groeben, G. Rother, J. Bühling, A. Verhauwen, J. Künzel, D. Jestaedt, M. Bergermann, J. Vogtmeier and A. Kramer, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: José Luis Florido Rodríguez (Seville, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 March 2014 (Case R 1569/2013-4), relating to opposition proceedings between José Luis Florido Rodriguez and CareAbout GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders CareAbout GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/46

Judgment of the General Court of 26 November 2015 — NICO v Council

(Case T-371/14) (1)

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

(2016/C 027/56)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Naftiran Intertrade Co. (NICO) Sàrl (Pully, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Grayston, Solicitor, P. Gjørtler, G. Pandey, D. Rovetta and N. Pilkington, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application for annulment of the Council decision contained in the letter of 14 March 2014 by which the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of person and entities subject to restrictive measures set out 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), as amended by Council Decision 2012/635/CFSP of 15 October 2012 (OJ 2012 L 282, p. 58), and in Annex IX to Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 of 15 October 2012 (OJ 2012 L 282, p. 16).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Naftiran Intertrade Co. (NICO) Sàrl to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
1.

Annuls Council Decision 2014/119/CFSP of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, as amended by Council Implementing Decision 2014/216/CFSP of 14 April 2014 implementing Decision 2014/119, and Council Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 of 5 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, as amended by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 381/2014 of 14 April 2014 implementing Regulation No 208/2014, in so far as they concern Mr Oleksii Mykolayovych Azarov;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 98/34

Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2016 — LR Health & Beauty Systems v OHIM — Robert McBride (LR nova pure.)

(Case T-202/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark LR nova pure. - Earlier international word mark NOVA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 098/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH (Ahlen, Germany) (represented by: N. Weber and L. Thiel, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Robert McBride Ltd (Manchester, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 January 2014 (Case R 272/2013-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Robert McBride Ltd and LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LR Health & Beauty Systems GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 235, 21.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 118/30

Judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2016 — Consolidated Artists v OHIM — Body Cosmetics International (MANGO)

(Case T-761/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark MANGO - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 52(2) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 118/33)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Consolidated Artists BV (Amstelveen, Netherlands) (represented by: B. Corne, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Body Cosmetics International GmbH (Willich, Germany) (represented by: M. Müller-Mergenthaler, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 September 2014 (Case R 2337/2013-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Body Cosmetics International GmbH and Consolidated Artists BV.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Consolidated Artists BV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 111/22

Judgment of the General Court of 18 February 2016 — Penny-Markt v OHIM — Boquoi Handels (B! O)

(Case T-364/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark B! O - Earlier Community word mark bo - Relative ground for refusal - Article 53(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 111/26)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Penny-Markt GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey, S. Brandstätter and A. Wagner, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Boquoi Handels OHG (Straelen, Germany) (represented by: P. Mels, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 March 2014 (R 1201/2013-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Boquoi Handels OHG and Penny-Markt GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Penny-Markt GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 191/25

Judgment of the General Court of 7 April 2016 — Industrias Tomás Morcillo v EUIPO — Aucar Trailer (Polycart A Whole Cart Full of Benefits)

(Case T-613/14) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark Polycart A Whole Cart Full of Benefits - Earlier European Union figurative mark POLICAR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 191/31)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Industrias Tomás Morcillo, SL (Albuixech, Spain) (represented by: A. Sanz-Bermell y Martínez, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and A. Schifko, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO: Aucar Trailer, SL (Premia de Mar, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the EUIPO of 7 May 2014 (Case R 1735/2012-1), elating to opposition proceedings between Aucar Trailer, SL and Industrias Tomás Morcillo, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Industrias Tomás Morcillo, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 339, 29.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 136/32

Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2016 — Ugly v OHIM — Group Lottuss (COYOTE UGLY)

(Case T-778/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark COYOTE UGLY - Relative grounds for refusal - Revocation of the earlier Community word mark - Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - No non-registered mark - Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 - No well-known mark within the meaning of Article 6 bis of the Paris Convention - Article 8(2)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rejection of the opposition))

(2016/C 136/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ugly, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: T. St Quintin, Barrister, K. Gilbert and C. Mackey, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Group Lottuss Corp., SL (Barcelona, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 September 2014 (Case R 1369/2013-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ugly Inc. and Group Lottuss Corp.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 26, 26.1.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/14

Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2016 — Chung-Yuan Chang v EUIPO — BSH Hausgeräte (AROMA)

(Case T-749/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union — Word mark AROMA - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 232/17)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Peter Chung-Yuan Chang (San Diego, California, United States) (represented by: A. Sanz-Bermell y Martínez, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: BSH Hausgeräte GmbH, formerly BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Biagosh, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 September 2014 (Case R 1887/2013-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Peter Chung-Yuan Chang and BSH Hausgeräte.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 September 2014 (Case R 1887/2013-4);

2. Orders EUIPO and BSH Hausgeräte GmbH to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Peter Chung-Yuan Chang.

(1) OJ C 16, 19.1.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 May 2016 — August Storck v EUIPO (Representation of a white and blue square-shaped packaging)

(Case T-806/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark representing white and blue square-shaped packaging - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 222/17)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: August Storck KG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: P. Goldenbaum, I. Rohr, T. Melchert and A.-C. Richter, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: V. Melgar and H. Kunz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 September 2014 (Case R 644/2014-5), concerning the international registration designating the European Union of a figurative mark representing white and blue square-shaped packaging.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders August Storck KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 46, 9.2.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 305/29

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2016 — Latvia v Commission

(Case T-661/14) (1)

((EAGGF, EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Flat-rate financial correction - Conditionality - Minimum requirements for good agricultural and environmental conditions - Norms - Article 5(1) and Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 - Article 6(1) and Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 73/2009))

(2016/C 305/40)

Language of the case: Latvian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Latvia (represented by: I. Kalniņš and D. Pelše, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Sauka and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2014/458/EU of 9 July 2014 on 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 2014 L 205, p. 62), in so far as that decision excludes from EU financing certain expenditure of the Republic of Latvia, amounting to EUR 739 393,95, due to the fact that it is incompatible with EU rules.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Implementing Decision 2014/458/EU of 9 July 2014 on 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), in so far as that decision excludes from EU financing certain expenditure of the Republic of Latvia, amounting to EUR 739 393,95, due to the fact that it is incompatible with EU rules;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 395, 10.11.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 251/22

Judgment of the General Court of 31 May 2016 — Warimex v EUIPO (STONE)

(Case T-454/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark STONE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 251/23)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Warimex Waren-Import Export Handels-GmbH (Neuried, Germany) (represented by: E. Keller and J. Voogd, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2014 (Case R 1599/2013-1) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign STONE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Warimex Waren-Import Export Handels-GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 292, 1.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/28

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2016 — Tri-Ocean Trading v Council

(Case T-709/14) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Error of assessment))

(2016/C 392/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tri-Ocean Trading (George Town, Cayman Islands) (represented by: B. Kennelly, Barrister, P. Saini QC, and N. Sheikh, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2014/488/CFSP of 22 July 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2014 L 217, p. 49) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 793/2014 of 22 July 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2014 L 217, p. 10), insofar as those measures concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Implementing Decision 2014/488/CFSP of 22 July 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 793/2014 of 22 July 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria, in so far as they concern Tri-Ocean Trading;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Tri-Ocean Trading.

(1) OJ C 448, 15.12.2014.