ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 13 March 2019 — Espírito Santo Financial Group v ECB

(Case T-730/16) (1)

(Access to documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - Documents relating to the ECB’s decision of 1 August 2014 concerning Banco Espírito Santo SA - Partial refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the confidentiality of the proceedings of the ECB’s decision-making bodies - Exception relating to the financial, monetary or economic policy of the European Union or of a Member State - Exception relating to the stability of the financial system in the European Union or in a Member State - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - Exception relating to documents intended for internal use - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 148/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Espírito Santo Financial Group SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: R. Oliveira, S. Estima Martins and D. Duarte de Campos, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and S. Lambrinoc, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, lawyer)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the ECB’s decision of 31 August 2016 refusing in part to disclose certain documents relating to its decision of 1 August 2014 concerning Banco Espírito Santo SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 31 August 2016 partially refusing to disclose certain documents relating to its decision of 1 August 2014 concerning Banco Espírito Santo SA, in so far as it refused to disclose the amount of credit indicated in the extracts of the minutes recording the decision of the Governing Council of the ECB of 28 July 2014 and the information redacted from the proposals of the Executive Board of the ECB of 28 July and 1 August 2014;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Espírito Santo Financial Group SA and the ECB to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 462, 12.12.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2019 — Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology and Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea v Commission

(Case T-8/16) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for optical disk drives - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Collusive agreements relating to procurement events organised by two computer manufacturers - Breach of essential procedural requirements and of the rights of the defence - Jurisdiction of the Commission - Geographic scope of the infringement - Single and continuous infringement - Principle of good administration - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines)

(2019/C 328/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) and Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. (Suwon-si, South Korea) (represented initially by M. Bay, J. Ruiz Calzado, A. Aresu and A. Scordamaglia-Tousis, and subsequently by M. Bay, J. Ruiz Calzado and A. Aresu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by N. Khan, A. Biolan and M. Farley, and subsequently by A. Biolan, M. Farley and A. Cleenewerck de Crayencour, Agents,)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking, principally, annulment in whole or in part of Commission Decision C(2015) 7135 final of 21 October 2015 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39639 — Optical disk drives), or, in the alternative, a reduction of the amount of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp. and Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. to bear their own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2019 — PT v EIB

(Case T-573/16) (1)

(Civil Service - EIB staff - Organisation of services - Time dispensation - Access to e-mail and IT connections - Pre-litigation procedure - Admissibility - Legal certainty - Right to be heard - Presumption of innocence - OLAF Final Report - Obligation to state reasons - Liability - Material damage - Non-material damage)

(2019/C 295/21)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: PT (represented by: E. Nordh, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented initially by G. Nuvoli, E. Raimond, T. Gilliams and G. Faedo, and subsequently by G. Faedo and M. Loizou, acting as Agents, and by M. Johansson, B. Wägenbaur, lawyers and J. Currall, Barrister)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, the annulment of the decisions of the EIB of 13 April, 12 May, 16 June and 20 October 2015, 6 June 2016 and 7 February 2017 on the applicant’s time dispensation, the decision of the EIB of 18 June 2015 to block the applicant’s access to his e-mail and to the EIB’s IT connections and the decisions of the EIB not to communicate his remuneration slips to him and to delete his name from the organisation chart published on the EIB’s intranet and, secondly, compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 13 April, 12 May, 16 June and 20 October 2015, 6 June 2016 and 7 February 2017, on the PT’s time dispensation, and the EIB’s decision of 18 June 2015 to block PT’s access to his e-mail and to the EIB’s IT connections;

2. Orders the EIB to pay PT, in respect of the non-material damage suffered, an amount of EUR 25 000 plus default interest, from the date of delivery of this judgment, at the rate set by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its principal refinancing operations, plus 3.5 points.

3. Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

4. Orders the EIB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 383, 17.10.2016 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under Case F-150/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2020 — Ireland and Others v Commission

(Cases T-778/16 and T-892/16) (1)

(State aid - Aid implemented by Ireland - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering recovery of the aid - Advance tax decisions (tax rulings) - Selective tax advantages - Arm’s length principle)

(2020/C 371/05)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant in Case T-778/16: Ireland (represented by: K. Duggan, M. Browne, J. Quaney and A. Joyce, acting as Agents, and P. Gallagher, M. Collins, Senior Counsel, P. Baker QC, S. Kingston, C. Donnelly, A. Goodman and B. Doherty, Barristers)

Applicants in Case T-892/16: Apple Sales International (Cork, Ireland), Apple Operations Europe (Cork) (represented by: A. von Bonin and E. van der Stok, lawyers, D. Beard QC, and A. Bates, L. Osepciu and J. Bourke, Barristers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P.-J. Loewenthal and R. Lyal, acting as Agents)

Intervener in Case T-778/16, in support of the applicant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: T. Uri, acting as Agent, and D. Waelbroeck and S. Naudin, lawyers)

Intervener in Case T-892/16, in support of the applicants: Ireland (represented by: K. Duggan, J. Quaney, M. Browne, A Joyce, P. Gallagher, M. Collins, P. Baker, S. Kingston, C. Donnelly, and B. Doherty)

Intervener in Case T-778/16, in support of the defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, M. Rzotkiewicz and A. Kramarczyk-Szaładzińska, acting as Agents)

Intervener in Case T-892/16, in support of the defendant: EFTA Surveillance Authority (represented by: C. Zatschler, M. Sánchez Rydelski and C. Simpson, acting as Agents)

Re:

Applications under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1283 of 30 August 2016 on State aid SA.38373 (2014/C) (ex 2014/NN) (ex 2014/CP) implemented by Ireland to Apple (OJ 2017 L 187, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-778/16 and T-892/16 for the purposes of the present judgment;

2. Annuls Commission Decision (EU) 2017/1283 of 30 August 2016 on State aid SA.38373 (2014/C) (ex 2014/NN) (ex 2014/CP) implemented by Ireland to Apple;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Ireland, in the context of Case T-778/16, and those of Apple Sales International and Apple Operations Europe;

4. Orders Ireland, in the context of Case T-892/16, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Poland and the EFTA Surveillance Authority to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Tàpias v Council

(Case T-527/16) (1)

(Civil Service - Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS that entered into force on 1 January 2014 - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1023/2013 - Solidarity levy applicable from 1 January 2014 - Suspension of application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014)

(2020/C 36/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Margarita Tàpias (Wavre, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and N. Flandin, lawyers)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Ecker, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision fixing the applicant’s remuneration for January 2014, as given specific expression in the salary slip for that month sent to her on 14 January 2014, which is the first salary slip to apply, with regard to the applicant, Article 65(4) and Article 66a of the Staff Regulations stemming from Article 1(44) and (46) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 (OJ 2013 L 287, p.15) providing, respectively, for the suspension of the application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014 and the introduction of a solidarity levy from 1 January 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Margarita Tàpias to pay the costs;

3. Orders the European Parliament to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 7, 12.1.2015 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-121/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1 September 2016).
Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — QI and Others v Commission and ECB

(Case T-868/16) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Economic and monetary policy - Restructuring of Greek public debt - Bond exchange agreement for the sole benefit of the Eurosystem central banks - Private sector involvement - Collective action clauses - Private creditors - Official sector creditors - Attributability - Sufficiently serious infringement of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Article 63(1) TFEU - Articles 120 to 127 and Article 352(1) TFEU - Right to property - Equal treatment)

(2022/C 128/18)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: QI and the 15 other applicants whose names are set out in the annex to the judgment (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: J.-P. Keppenne, L. Flynn and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents) and European Central Bank (represented by: K. Laurinavičius and M. Szablewska, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendants: European Council and Council of the European Union (represented by: K. Michoel, E. Chatziioakeimidou and J. Bauerschmidt, acting as Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants following the implementation of a mandatory exchange of State bonds in the context of the restructuring of Greek public debt in 2012 through the involvement of private investors by means of the application of collective action clauses, due to the conduct and actions of, in particular, the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the ECB.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders QI and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to pay, in addition to their own costs, those incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB);

3. Orders the European Council and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 30, 30.1.2017.
Judgment of the General Court of 7 July 2021 — HM v Commission

(Case T-587/16 RENV) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Competition notice EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 - Refusal to allow participation in the assessment tests - Request for review - Refusal to forward that request to the selection board for the open competition on the grounds that it was out of time - Division of competences between EPSO and the competition selection board - Interest in bringing proceedings)

(2021/C 338/20)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: HM (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 270 TFEU for the annulment of the decision of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) of 17 August 2015 not to take into account the request for review of the decision of the selection board not to allow the applicant to participate in the next stage of Competition EPSO/AST-SC/03/15-3.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) of 17 August 2015 not to take into account the request for review of the decision of the selection board not to allow the applicant to participate in the next stage of Competition EPSO/AST-SC/03/15-3;

2. Orders the European Commission to pay the costs relating to the initial proceedings before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (F-17/16) and the General Court (T-587/16), the proceedings before the Court of Justice in Case C-70/19 P and the present referral proceedings (T-587/16 RENV).

(1) OJ C 191, 30.5.2016 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-17/16 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Case T-87/17: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2017 — Kuka Systems v EUIPO (Matrix light) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark Matrix light — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2017 — Kuka Systems v EUIPO (Matrix light)

(Case T-87/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark Matrix light — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Kuka Systems GmbH (Augsburg, Germany) (represented by: B. Maneth and C. Huch-Hallwachs, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 December 2016 (Case R 886/2016-4), relating to an application for registration of the word sign Matrix light as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kuka Systems GmbH to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 104, 3.4.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 152/31

Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2018 — La Mafia Franchises v EUIPO — Italy (La Mafia SE SIENTA A LA MESA)

(Case T-1/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark La Mafia SE SIENTA A LA MESA - Absolute ground for refusal - Whether contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality - Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 152/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: La Mafia Franchises, SL (Zaragoza, Spain) (represented by: I. Sempere Massa, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by D. Del Gaizo, avvocato dello Stato)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 October 2016 (Case R 803/2016-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between the Italian Republic and La Mafia Franchises.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders La Mafia Franchises, SL, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 53, 20.2.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 112/30

Judgment of the General Court of 8 February 2018 — Institute for Direct Democracy in Europe v Parliament

(Case T-118/17) (1)

((Law governing the institutions - European Parliament - Decision awarding a grant to a political foundation for the financial year 2017 and providing for pre-financing at a rate of 33 % of the maximum grant amount and the obligation to provide a pre-financing bank guarantee - Action for annulment - Challengeable act - Admissibility - Obligation of impartiality - Rights of the defence - Financial regulation - Rules of application of the Financial Regulation - Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 - Proportionality))

(2018/C 112/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Institute for Direct Democracy in Europe ASBL (IDDE) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: E. Plasschaert and É. Montens, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: C. Burgos and S. Alves, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of European Parliament Decision FINS-2017-28 of 12 December 2016 concerning the award of a grant to the applicant in so far as that decision suspends the payment of that grant for the financial year 2017 and limits the pre-financing to 33 % of the maximum grant amount subject to the provision of a bank guarantee.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Institute for Direct Democracy in Europe ASBL (IDDE) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Parliament, including those relating to the application for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.
Case T-200/17: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — SB v EUIPO (Civil service — Temporary staff — Fixed-term contract — Decision not to renew — Plea of illegality — Duty to state reasons — Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff — Discrimination on grounds of age)

Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — SB v EUIPO

(Case T-200/17) ( 1 )

‛(Civil service — Temporary staff — Fixed-term contract — Decision not to renew — Plea of illegality — Duty to state reasons — Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff — Discrimination on grounds of age)’

Parties

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

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Tóth and A. Lukošiūtė, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Executive Director of EUIPO dated 2 June 2016 refusing a second renewal of the applicant’s contract and that director’s decision dated 19 December 2016 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SB to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.
Case T-221/17: Judgment of the General Court of 24 April 2018 — Mémora Servicios Funerarios v EUIPO — Chatenoud (MEMORAME) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MEMORAME — Earlier EU figurative mark mémora and earlier national word marks MÉMORA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods and services — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 24 April 2018 — Mémora Servicios Funerarios v EUIPO — Chatenoud (MEMORAME)

(Case T-221/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MEMORAME — Earlier EU figurative mark mémora and earlier national word marks MÉMORA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods and services — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Mémora Servicios Funerarios SLU (Zaragoza, Spain) (represented by: C. Marí Aguilar and J. Gallego Jiménez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Georges Chatenoud (Thiviers, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 February 2017 (Case R 1308/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Mémora Servicios Funerarios and Mr Chatenoud.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mémora Servicios Funerarios SLU to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Case T-258/17: Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2018 — Arbuzov v Council (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 economic resources — Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment)

Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2018 — Arbuzov v Council

(Case T-258/17) ( 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 economic resources — Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list — Obligation to state reasons — Manifest error of assessment)’

Parties

Applicant: Sergej Arbuzov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: R. Pekař and J.-P. Hix, acint as Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION pursuant to 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 (JO 2017 L 58, p. 34), in so far as the applicant’s name was included or maintained in the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls 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 in so far as Sergej Arbuzov’s name was maintained in the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 213, 3.7.2017.