ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Prysmian and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi v Commission

(Case T-475/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Single and continuous infringement - Illegal nature of the inspection decision - Reasonable time - Principle of sound administration - Principle of personal responsibility - Joint and several liability for payment of the fine - Sufficient proof of the infringement - Duration of the infringement - Fines - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2018/C 328/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Prysmian SpA (Milan, Italy) and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl (Milan) (represented by: C. Tesauro, F. Russo, L. Armati and C. Toniolo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Giolito, L. Malferrari, P. Rossi and H. van Vliet, and subsequently by C. Giolito, P. Rossi and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by S. Kingston, Barrister)

Intervener in support of the applicants: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: W. Deselaers, J. Koponen and A. Mangiaracina, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Pirelli & C. SpA (Milan) (represented by: M. Siragusa, G. Rizza, P. Ferrari, F. Moretti and A. Fava, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Prysmian SpA and Prysmian Cavi e Sistemi Srl to bear their own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

3. Orders The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. and Pirelli & C. SpA to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 315, 15.9.2014.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — BPC Lux 2 and Others v Commission

(Case T-812/14 RENV) (1)

(State aid - Aid granted by the Portuguese authorities for the resolution of the financial institution Banco Espírito Santo - Creation and capitalisation of a Bridge Bank - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Lack of standing - Inadmissibility)

(2020/C 61/27)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: BPC Lux 2 Sàrl (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) and the 19 other applicants whose names are set out in the Annex to the judgment (represented by: J. Webber and M. Steenson, Solicitors, and B. Woolgar and K. Bacon, Barristers)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes and S. Jaulino, acting as Agents, and M. Mendes Pereira, lawyer)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 5682 final of 3 August 2014 on State aid SA.39250 (2014/N) — Portugal — Resolution of Banco Espírito Santo, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Orders BPC Lux 2 Sàrl and the other applicants whose names are set out in the Annex to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission for the proceedings for interim relief, at first instance and after referral back to the General Court;

3. Orders the Commission to bear the costs incurred by it in the proceedings on the appeal;

4. Orders the Portuguese Republic to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 46, 9.2.2015.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2018 — Lupin v Commission

(Case T-680/14) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for perindopril, a medicinal product intended for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, in its originator and generic versions - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Patent dispute settlement agreement - Technology acquisition agreement - Restriction of competition by object - Balance between competition law and patent law - Fines))

(2019/C 82/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lupin Ltd (Maharashtra, India) (represented initially by M. Pullen, R. Fawcett-Feuillette, Solicitors, M. Hoskins QC, V. Wakefield, Barrister and M. Boles, Solicitor, and subsequently by M. Hoskins, V. Wakefield, M. Boles, K. Vernon and S. Smith, Solicitors, and lastly by M. Hoskins, V. Wakefield, S. Smith and C. Wall, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by F. Castilla Contreras, B. Mongin and T. Vecchi, and subsequently by F. Castilla Contreras, B. Mongin and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents, and by B. Rayment, Barrister)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 4955 final of 9 July 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 and Article 102 TFEU [Case AT.39612 — Perindopril (Servier)] in so far as it concerns the applicant, and, in the alternative, for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Lupin Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 439, 8.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 48/50

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien v OHIM — Ruiz Moncayo (RED RIDING HOOD)

(Case T-128/15) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark RED RIDING HOOD - Earlier national and international word marks ROTKÄPPCHEN - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 048/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH (Freyburg, Germany) (represented by: W. Berlit, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Alberto Ruiz Moncayo (Entrena, Spain) (represented by E. Valentín Prades, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 January 2015 (Case R 1012/2014-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH and Alberto Ruiz Moncayo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 171, 26.5.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 191/27

Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2016 — Facchinello v EUIPO — Olimpia Splendid (Synthesis)

(Case T-81/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark Synthesis - Absence of genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Evidence presented for the first time before the General Court))

(2016/C 191/35)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Danila Facchinello (Molinella, Italy) (represented by: F. Torlontano, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Olimpia Splendid Spa (Gualtieri, Italy) (represented by: A. Ferrarese and G. Ferrarese, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 November 2014 (Case R 2169/2013-1), relating to revocation proceedings between Olimpia Splendid SpA and Ms Danila Facchinello.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ms Danila Facchinello to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 156/40

Judgment of the General Court of 17 March 2016 — Mudhook Marketing v OHIM (IPVanish)

(Case T-78/15) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark IPVanish - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 156/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mudhook Marketing, Inc. (Winter Park, Florida, United States) (represented by: H. Eckermann and A. Dellmeier, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2014 (Case R 1417/2014-2), relating to an application for registration of the word sign IPVanish as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mudhook Marketing, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 127, 20.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 251/28

Judgment of the General Court of 26 May 2016 — Aldi Einkauf v EUIPO — Dyado Liben (Casale Fresco)

(Case T-254/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Casale Fresco - Earlier EU word mark FREZCO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 251/32)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and N. Bertram, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Dyado Liben OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 March 2015 (Case R 1138/2014-4) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Casale Fresco as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 245, 27.7.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 May 2016 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-47/15) (1)

((State aid - Renewable energy - Aid granted by certain provisions of the amended German law concerning renewable energy sources (EEG 2012) - Aid supporting renewable electricity and reduced EEG surcharge for energy-intensive users - Decision declaring the aid partially incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - Advantage - State resources))

(2016/C 222/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented initially by T. Henze and K. Petersen, and subsequently by T. Henze and K. Stranz, acting as Agents, and by T. Lübbig, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, and subsequently by T. Maxian Rusche and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2015/1585 of 25 November 2014 on the aid scheme SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) (implemented by Germany for the support of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users) (OJ 2015 L 250, p. 122).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 127, 20.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 314/23

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2016 — Volkswagen v EUIPO (ConnectedWork)

(Case T-491/15) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for European Union word mark ConnectedWork - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 314/31)

Language of the case: German

Parties

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

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Eberl and A. Schifko, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2015 (Case R 160/2015-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign ConnectedWork as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Volkswagen AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 287/21

Judgment of the General Court of 28 June 2016 — salesforce.com, Inc. v EUIPO (SOCIAL.COM)

(Case T-134/15) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for European Union word mark SOCIAL.COM - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 287/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: salesforce.com, Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States) (represented by: A. Nordemann and M. Maier, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 January 2015 (Case R 1752/2014-4), concerning an application for registration of the word mark SOCIAL.COM as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders salesforce.com, Inc., to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 171, 26.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/38

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2016 — Pohjanmäki v Council

(Case T-410/15 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2013 promotion year - Respective roles of the Appointing Authority and the Joint Consultative Committee - Absence of staff reports - Failure on the part of the members of the JCC to consult the staff reports - Compatibility of the functions of the rapporteur in the JCC with those of the former rapporteur - Equal treatment - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 392/49)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Jaana Pohjanmäki (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Rebasti and M. Bauer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 May 2015, Pohjanmäki v Council (F-44/14, EU:F:2015:46) seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Ms Jaana Pohjanmäki to bear her own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union in the appeal.

(1) OJ C 337, 12.10.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/41

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2016 — Paglieri Sell System v EUIPO (APOTEKE)

(Case T-563/15) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Application for figurative mark APOTEKE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 392/53)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Paglieri Sell System SpA (Pozzolo Formigaro, Italy) (represented by: P. Pozzi and F. Braga, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Doherty and L, Rampini, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 July 2015 (Case R 2428/2014-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign APOTEKE as a European Union trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Paglieri Sell Systems SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 9.11.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 419/44

Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — The Art Company B & S v EUIPO — G-Star Raw (THE ART OF RAW)

(Case T-593/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark THE ART OF RAW - Earlier national and EU figurative marks art and earlier EU figurative mark The Art Company - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 419/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Art Company B & S, SA (Quel, Spain) (represented by: J. Villamor Muguerza, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: G-Star Raw CV (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 July 2015 (Case R 1980/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between The Art Company B & S and G-Star Raw.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders The Art Company B & S, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 414, 14.12.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 410/19

Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2016 — LLR-G5 v EUIPO Glycan Finance (SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5)

(Case T-539/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative EU trade mark SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5 - Earlier international word marks Silicium Organique G5- Glycan 5-Si-Glycan-5-Si-G5 and Silicium Organique G5 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 410/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: LLR-G5 Ltd (Castlebar, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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: Glycan Finance Corp. Ltd (Sheffield, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 June 2015 (Case R 291/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Glycan Finance Corp. and LLR-G5.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LLR-G5 Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 381, 16.11.2015.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2016 — Clover Canyon v EUIPO — Kaipa Sportswear (CLOVER CANYON)

(Case T-693/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark CLOVER CANYON - Earlier national word mark CANYON - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion))

(2016/C 454/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Clover Canyon, Inc. (Los Angeles, California, United States) (represented by: T. Schmitz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Kaipa Sportswear GmbH (Heilbronn, Germany) (represented by: D. Pauli, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 August 2015 (Case R 3018/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Kaipa Sportswear and Clover Canyon.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Clover Canyon, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 419/41

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2016 — ECDC v CJ

(Case T-395/15) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Member of the contract staff - Fixed-term contract - Termination - Breakdown in the relationship of trust - Right to be heard))

(2016/C 419/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (represented by: J. Mannheim and A. Daume, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: CJ (Agios Stefanos, Greece) (represented by: V. Kolias, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 29 April 2015, CJ v ECDC (F-159/12 and F-161/12, EU:F:2015:38), seeking to have that judgment set aside in part.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 311, 21.9.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/30

Judgment of the General Court of 6 December 2016 — Groupe Go Sport v EUIPO — Design Go (GO SPORT)

(Case T-703/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU word mark GO SPORT - Earlier national word marks GO - Partial refusal of registration by the Opposition Division - Late filing of the statement of grounds of appeal - Inadmissibility of the appeal brought before the Board of Appeal - Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Rule 49(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

(2017/C 022/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Groupe Go Sport (Sassenage, France) (represented by: G. Arbant and E. Henry-Mayer, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Design Go Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 September 2015 (Case R 569/2015-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Design Go and Groupe Go Sport.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Groupe Go Sport to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 48, 8.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 462/16

Judgment of the General Court of 28 October 2016 — Unicorn v EUIPO — Mercilink Equipment Leasing (UNICORN)

(Case T-125/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark UNICORN - Earlier national word and figurative marks UNICORN and earlier national figurative mark representing a unicorn’s head - Relative ground for refusal - Reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 462/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Unicorn a.s. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: L. Lorenc, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mercilink Equipment Leasing Ltd (Limassol, Cyprus)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 January 2015 (Case R 150/2014-5), concerning opposition proceedings between Unicorn and Mercilink Equipment Leasing.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Unicorn a.s. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 171, 26.5.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/29

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Redpur v EUIPO — Redwell Manufaktur (Redpur)

(Case T-227/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Redpur - Earlier EU figurative mark redwell INFRAROT HEIZUNGEN - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 038/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Redpur GmbH (Hayingen, Germany) (represented by: S. Schiller, lawyer)

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: Redwell Manufaktur GmbH (Rotenturm an der Pinka, Austria) (represented by C. Gassauer-Fleissner, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 February 2015 (Case R 678/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Redpur and Redwell Manufaktur.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Redpur GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 236, 20.7.2015.