ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2019 — Executive Selling v EUIPO (EXECUTIVE SELLING)

(Case T-689/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark EXECUTIVE SELLING - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 357/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Executive Selling (Paris, France) (represented by: V. Bouchara and A. Maier, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 September 2018 (Case R 313/2018-1), concerning an international registration designating the European Union of figurative sign EXECUTIVE SELLING.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Executive Selling to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — France v Commission

(Case T-507/18) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenses incurred by France under the Programme of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI) - Inaccurate accounting for certain consignments of bananas (financial years 2013 — 2016) - Flat-rate financial correction)

(2019/C 413/61)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented by: F. Alabrune, D. Colas, S. Horrenberger, A.-L. Desjonquères, A. Alidière and C. Mosser, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Lewis and J. Aquilina, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/873 of 13 June 2018 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 2018 L 152, p. 29) in so far as it applies to the French Republic a financial correction of 5 %, amounting to a total sum of EUR 1 945 435,39, as regards the measures entitled ‘Other Direct Aid — POSEI’, on the ground of ‘[i]naccurate accounting for certain consignments of bananas’ for the financial years 2013 — 2016.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2019 — Venezuela v Council

(Case T-65/18) (1)

(Action for annulment - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken with regard to the situation in Venezuela - Action brought by a third State - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility)

(2019/C 399/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (represented by: F. Di Gianni and L. Giuliano, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented: initially by P. Mahnič and L. Ozola, and subsequently by P. Mahnič and A. Antoniadis, Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment, first, of Council Regulation (EU) 2017/2063 of 13 November 2017 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2017 L 295, p. 21), secondly, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1653 of 6 November 2018 implementing Regulation 2017/2063 (OJ 2018 L 276, p. 1), and, thirdly, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1656 of 6 November 2018 amending Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2018 L 276, p. 10), in so far as their provisions concern the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

(1) OJ C 134 du 16.4.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2019 – McDreams Hotel GmbH v EUIPO – McDonald’s International Property (mc dreams hotels Träumen zum kleinen Preis!)

(Case T-428/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark mc dreams hotels Träumen zum kleinen Preis! - Earlier EU word mark McDONALD’S - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Family of marks - Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark)

(2019/C 423/48)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: McDreams Hotel GmbH (Feldkirchen, Germany) (represented by: S. Schenk and S. Kleinmanns, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: McDonald’s International Property Co. Ltd (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: C. Eckhartt and K. Thanbichler-Brandl, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 April 2018 (Case R 972/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between McDonald’s International Property Co. and McDreams Hotel.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders McDreams Hotel GmbH to bear its own costs and pay those of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and the intervener.

(1) OJ C 319, 10.9.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 October 2019 — Biasotto v EUIPO — Oofos (OOF)

(Case T-453/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark OOF - Earlier EU word mark OOFOS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 423/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Alessandro Biasotto (Treviso, Italy) (represented by F. Le Divelec Lemmi, R. Castiglioni and E. Cammareri, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Oofos, Inc. (Reno, Nevada, United States) (represented by J. Klink, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 May 2018 (Case R 1270/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Oofos and Mr Biasotto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Alessandro Biasotto to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 352, 1.10.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2019 –EPSU and Goudriaan v Commission

(Case T-310/18) (1)

(Social policy - Dialogue between the social partners at EU level - Agreement entitled ‘General framework for informing and consulting civil servants and employees of central government administrations’ - Joint request of the signatory parties seeking the implementation of that agreement at EU level - Refusal by the Commission to submit a proposal for a decision to the Council - Action for annulment - Challengeable act - Admissibility - Commission’s discretion - Autonomy of the social partners - Principle of subsidiarity - Proportionality)

(2019/C 432/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) (Brussels (Belgium) and Jan Goudriaan (Brussels) (represented by: R. Arthur, Solicitor, and by R. Palmer and K. Apps, Barristers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Martínez del Peral, M. van Beek and M. Kellerbauer, Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of the Commission’s decision of 5 March 2018 refusing to submit to the Council of the European Union a proposal for a decision to implement the agreement entitled ‘General framework for informing and consulting civil servants and employees of central government administrations’, signed by the Trade Unions’ National and European Administration Delegation (TUNED) and European Public Administration Employers (EUPAE) on 21 December 2015.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) and Jan Goudriaan, and the European Commission to each bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 259, 23.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2019 — Atos Medical v EUIPO — Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb (medical plasters)

(Case T-560/18) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a medical plaster - Disclosure of the earlier designs - Ground for invalidity - Individual character - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - Different overall impression - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2019/C 432/55)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Atos Medical GmbH (Troisdorf, Germany) (represented by: K. Middelhoff, G. Schoenen and S. Biermann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: F. Kramer, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2018 (Case R 2216/2016-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Atos Medical and Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Atos Medical GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 5.11.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Refan Bulgaria v EUIPO (Shape of a flower)

(Case T-747/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a flower - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons)

(2020/C 36/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Refan Bulgaria OOD (Trud, Bulgaria) (represented by: A. Ivanova, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 September 2018 (Case R 2518/2017-1), regarding an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a flower as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Refan Bulgaria OOD to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 November 2019 — August Wolff v EUIPO Faes Farma (DermoFaes Atopimed)

(Case T-642/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark DermoFaes Atopimed - Earlier EU word mark Dermowas - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 19/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel (Bielefeld, Germany) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Faes Farma, SA (Lamiaco-Leioa, Spain) (represented by: A. Vela Ballesteros and S. Fernandez Malvar, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2018 (Case R 1365/2017-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Dr. August Wolff and Faes Farma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Faes Farma, SA, including those necessarily incurred by Faes Farma, SA, before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO

(1) OJ C 4, 7.1.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — Currency One v EUIPO — Cinkciarz.pl (CINKCIARZ)

(Case T-501/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark CINKCIARZ - Absolute grounds for refusal - Distinctive character - No descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Pejorative term relating to the goods or services at issue)

(2020/C 61/32)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Currency One S.A. (Poznań, Poland) (represented by: P. Szmidt and B. Jóźwiak, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Cinkciarz.pl sp. z o.o. (Zielona Góra, Poland) (represented by: E. Skrzydło-Tefelska and K. Gajek, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 June 2018 (Case R 2598/2017-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Currency One and Cinkciarz.pl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Currency One S.A. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Cinkciarz.pl sp. z o.o.

(1) OJ C 364, 8.10.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — XG v Commission

(Case T-504/18) (1)

(Staff of a private company providing IT services within the institution - Refusal to grant access to the Commission’s premises - Competence of the author of the act)

(2020/C 54/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: XG (represented by: S. Kaisergruber and A. Burghelle-Vernet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and T. Bohr, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of the decision of the Commission of 3 July 2018 maintaining its refusal to allow the applicant access to its premises.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 3 July 2018 maintaining its refusal to allow XG access to its premises;

2. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 373, 15.10.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Numbi v Council

(Case T-168/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality)

(2020/C 103/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: John Numbi (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, H. Marcos Fraile and S. Van Overmeire, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr John Numbi to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2020 — Dalasa v EUIPO — Charité — Universitätsmedizin Berlin (charantea)

(Case T-732/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark charantea - Earlier EU figurative mark CHARITÉ - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 95/32)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Dalasa Handelsgesellschaft mbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: I. Hödl, 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: Charité — Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Gliedkörperschaft Öffentlichen Rechts (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Wulff and K. Schmidt-Hern, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 October 2018 (Case R 539/2018-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Charité and Dalasa.

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 15 October 2018 (Case R 539/2018-4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Dalasa Handelsgesellschaft mbH in the proceedings before the General Court;

3. Orders Charité — Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Gliedkörperschaft Öffentlichen Rechts to bear the costs that it has incurred during the proceedings before the General Court;

4. Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

(1) OJ C 54, 11.2.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2020 — QB v ECB

(Case T-215/18) (1)

(Civil service - ECB staff - Appraisal exercise - Appraisal report for 2016 - Author of the appraisal report - Manifest error of assessment - Sick leave - Redeployment - Remuneration - Decision not to award a salary increase - Competence of the author of an act adversely affecting a party - Liability)

(2020/C 175/15)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: QB (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and M. Rötting, acting as Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, annulment of the applicant’s appraisal report for 2016 and of the decision of the ECB of 23 May 2017 not to award her a salary increase and, in so far as necessary, annulment of the decision of the ECB of 18 September 2017 and of its implicit decision rejecting, respectively, the applicant’s administrative appeal and claim, and, second, compensation in respect of the harm that the applicant allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 23 May 2017 not to award QB a salary increase;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders QB to bear two thirds of her own costs;

4. Orders the ECB to bear its own costs and to pay one third of the costs incurred by QB.

(1) OJ C 211, 18.6.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Mende Omalanga v Council

(Case T-176/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Right to respect for private and family life - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality - Modification of the forms of order sought)

(2020/C 103/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Lambert Mende Omalanga (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2018/569 of 12 April 2018 implementing Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 95, p. 21), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/566 of 12 April 2018 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 95, p. 9), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Lambert Mende Omalanga to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 28 May 2020 — Agrochem-Maks v Commission

(Case T-574/18) (1)

(Plant-protection products - Active substance oxasulfuron - Non-renewal of approval for placing on the market - Obligation to state reasons - Article 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Manifest error of assessment - Article 6(f) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and point 2.2 of Annex II to Regulation No 1107/2009 - Precautionary principle)

(2020/C 230/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Agrochem-Maks d.o.o. (Zagreb, Croatia) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Lewis, I. Naglis and G. Koleva, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Shev, J. Lundberg and H. Eklinder, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU, seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1019 of 18 July 2018 concerning the non-renewal of approval of the active substance oxasulfuron, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2018 L 183, p. 14).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Agrochem-Maks d.o.o. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission in the present action and in the proceedings for interim measures;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Sweden to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 427, 26.11.2018.