ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 213/31

Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2015 — Granette & Starorežná Distilleries v OHIM — Bacardi (42 VODKA JEMNÁ VODKA VYRÁBĚNÁ JEDINEČNOU TECHNOLOGIÍ 42 % vol.)

(Case T-607/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark 42 VODKA JEMNÁ VODKA VYRÁBĚNÁ JEDINEČNOU TECHNOLOGIÍ 42 % vol - Earlier international figurative mark 42 BELOW - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 213/53)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Granette & Starorežná Distilleries a.s, (Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic) (represented by: T. Chleboun, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially by D. Gája and P. Geroulakos, subsequently by M. Geroulakos and M. Šimandlova, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Bacardi C. Ltd (Vaduz, Liechtenstein) (represented by: M. Reinisch, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 September 2013 (Case R 1605/2012-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Bacardi Co. Ltd and Granette & Starorežná Distilleries a.s.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Granette & Starorežná Distilleries .a.s to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and by Bacardi Co. Ltd.

(1) OJ C 45, 15.2.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 198/33

Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2015 — Polynt and Sitre v ECHA

(Case T-134/13) (1)

((REACH - Identification of certain respiratory sensitisers as substances of very high concern - Equivalent level of concern - Action for annulment - Whether directly concerned - Admissibility - Rights of the defence - Proportionality))

(2015/C 198/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Polynt SpA (Scanzorosciate, Italy); and Sitre Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and T. Zbihlej, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicants: New Japan Chemical (Osaka, Japan); and REACh ChemAdvice GmbH (Kelkheim, Germany) (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: B. Koopman, M. Bulterman and C. Schillemans, acting as Agents); and European Commission (represented by: K. Mifsud-Bonnici and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Decision ED/169/2012 of the ECHA of 18 December 2012 concerning the inclusion of substances of very high concern in the list of candidate substances, in accordance with Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1), in so far as it concerns cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylic anhydride (EC No 201-604-9), cis-cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylic anhydride (EC No 236-086-3) and trans-cyclohexane-1,2-dicarboxylic anhydride (EC No 238-009-9).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Polynt SpA and Sitre Srl to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA);

3. Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the European Commission, New Japan Chemical and REACh ChemAdvice GmbH to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 4.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 262/22

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2015 — Gako Konietzko v OHIM (Shape of a cylindrical container in red and white)

(Case T-654/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for three-dimensional Community trade mark - Shape of a cylindrical container in red and white - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 262/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Gako Konietzko GmbH (Bamberg, Germany) (represented by: S. Reinhardt, 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 19 September 2013 (Case R 2232/2012-1), concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a cylindrical container in red and white as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Gako Konietzko GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 228/10

Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2015 — France v Commission

(Case T-259/13) (1)

((EAGGF - Guarantee Section - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Rural development support measures - Areas with natural handicaps - Flat rate financial correction - Expenditure incurred by France - Loading criterion - On-the-spot controls - Procedural safeguards))

(2015/C 228/11)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: French Republic (represented by: E. Belliard, D. Colas, C. Candat and G. de Bergues, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Bianchi and G. von Rintelen, acting as Agents)

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

Re:

Application for the partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2013/123/EU of 26 February 2013 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 2013 L 67, p. 20).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Implementing Decision 2013/123/EU of 26 February 2013 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 it applies a financial correction to the French Republic in the context of rural development support measures for sheep not covered by an application for sheep premiums for the accounting years 2008 and 2009;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the French Republic to bear three quarters of its own costs and three quarters of the costs incurred by the European Commission;

4. Orders the European Commission to bear one quarter of its own costs and one quarter of the costs incurred by the French Republic;

5. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 302/48

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — TVR Automotive v OHIM — TVR Italia (TVR ITALIA)

(Case T-398/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark TVR ITALIA - Earlier national and Community word marks TVR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Revocation proceedings - Genuine use of the earlier trade mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 15(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 302/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: TVR Automotive Ltd (Whiteley, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by G. Schneider and S. Hanne, and subsequently by J. Crespo Carillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: TVR Italia Srl (Canosa, Italy) (represented by: F. Caricato, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 May 2013 (Case R 823/2011-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Muadib Beteiligung GmbH and TVR Italia Srl.

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 14 May 2013 (Case R 823/2011-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Muadib Beteiligung GmbH and TVR Italia Srl;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders OHIM and TVR Italia Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 274, 21.9.2013.
Case T-489/13: Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2015 — La Rioja Alta v OHIM — Aldi Einkauf (VIÑA ALBERDI) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark VIÑA ALBERDI — Earlier national figurative mark VILLA ALBERTI — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — No coexistence of the marks — Likelihood of confusion)

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2015 — La Rioja Alta v OHIM — Aldi Einkauf (VIÑA ALBERDI)

(Case T-489/13) ( 1 )

‛(Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark VIÑA ALBERDI — Earlier national figurative mark VILLA ALBERTI — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — No coexistence of the marks — Likelihood of confusion)’

Parties

Applicant: La Rioja Alta, SA (Haro, Spain) (represented by: F. Pérez Álvarez, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG (Essen, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 July 2013 (Case R 1190/2011-4), concerning invalidity proceedings between Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG and La Rioja Alta, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders La Rioja Alta, SA to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 363/33

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2015 — Brouillard v Court of Justice

(Case T-420/13) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Conclusion of framework contracts - Translation of legal texts into French - Invitation to submit a tender - Exclusion of a proposed subcontractor - Professional capacity - Full legal education requirement - Recognition of professional qualifications - Proportionality - Transparency))

(2015/C 363/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alain Laurent Brouillard (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: initially J.-M. Gouazé, then J. Pertek and D. Dagyaran, lawyers)

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: A. Placco, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action for annulment of the letters of 5 June 2013 that the Court of Justice of the European Union addressed to IDEST Communication SA, by which it invited that company, first, to submit tenders in the context of a negotiated tender procedure relating to the conclusion of framework contracts for the translation of legal texts from certain official languages of the European Union into French (OJ 2013/S 47-075037) and, second, to confirm that the applicant would not be engaged in providing the services required under the contract.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Alain Laurent Brouillard to pay the costs of the proceedings.

(1) OJ C 325, 9.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 346/18

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2015 — Samsung SDI and Others v Commission

(Case T-84/13) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Global market for cathode ray tubes for television sets and computer monitors - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Agreements and concerted practices on pricing, market sharing, capacity and production - Single and continuous infringement - Duration of the infringement - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - 2006 Leniency Notice - Reduction of the fine - Calculation of the fine - Taking account of undertakings’ sales according to the place of delivery - Taking account of the average value of sales recorded during the infringement period))

(2015/C 346/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Samsung SDI Co. Ltd (Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea); Samsung SDI Germany GmbH (Berlin, Germany); and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Bhd (Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus, Malaysia) (represented initially by G. Berrisch, lawyer, D. Hull, Solicitor, and L.-A. Grelier, lawyer, then by D. Hull and L.-A. Grelier, and subsequently by L.-A. Grelier, D. Geradin, J. Ysewyn, P. Camesasca, lawyers, and J. Flynn QC)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan, G. Meessen and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2012) 8839 final of 5 December 2012 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.437 — TV and Computer Monitor Tubes) and for a reduction of the fines imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action in so far as it concerns Samsung SDI Germany GmbH;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders Samsung SDI Co. Ltd and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Bhd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 108, 13.4.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 389/38

Judgment of the General Court of 2 October 2015 — The Tea Board v OHIM — Delta Lingerie (Darjeeling collection de lingerie)

(Case T-625/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Figurative mark Darjeeling collection de lingerie - Earlier Community collective word and figurative marks DARJEELING - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 389/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Tea Board (Calcutta, India) (represented by: A. Nordemann and M. Maier, 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, intervener before the General Court: Delta Lingerie (Cachan, France) (represented by: G. Marchais and P. Martini-Berthon, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 September 2013 (Case R 1502/2012-2) concerning opposition proceedings between The Tea Board and Delta Lingerie.

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 17 September 2013 (Case R 1502/2012-2) as regards the goods in Class 25 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, and the ‘[r]etailing of women’s underwear and lingerie, perfumes, toilet water and cosmetic lotions, household and bath linen’ services in Class 35 of that agreement covered by the mark applied for;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 15.2.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 389/39

Judgment of the General Court of 2 October 2015 — The Tea Board v OHIM — Delta Lingerie (DARJEELING collection de lingerie)

(Case T-626/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Figurative mark Darjeeling collection de lingerie - Earlier Community collective word and figurative marks DARJEELING - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 389/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: The Tea Board (Calcutta, India) (represented by: A. Nordemann and M. Maier, 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, intervener before the General Court: Delta Lingerie (Cachan, France) (represented by: G. Marchais and P. Martini-Berthon, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 September 2013 (Case R 1501/2012-2) concerning opposition proceedings between The Tea Board and Delta Lingerie.

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 17 September 2013 (Case R 1501/2012-2) as regards the goods in Class 25 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, and the ‘[r]etailing of women’s underwear and lingerie, perfumes, toilet water and cosmetic lotions, household and bath linen’ services in Class 35 of that agreement covered by the mark applied for;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 15.2.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 429/18

Judgment of the General Court of 29 October 2015 — Éditions Quo Vadis v OHIM — Gómez Hernández (‘QUO VADIS’)

(Case T-517/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ‘QUO VADIS’ - Earlier national word mark QUO VADIS - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 429/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Éditions Quo Vadis (Carquefou, France) (represented by: F. Valentin and J. Canlorbe, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Francisco Gómez Hernández (Jacarilla, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 July 2013 (Case R 1166/2012-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Francisco Gómez Hernández and Éditions Quo Vadis.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Éditions Quo Vadis to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 398/35

Judgment of the General Court of 7 October 2015 — Panrico v OHIM — HDN Development (Krispy Kreme DOUGHNUTS)

(Case T-534/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark Krispy Kreme DOUGHNUTS - Earlier national and international word and figurative marks DONUT, DOGHNUTS, donuts and donuts cream - Relative ground of refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Likelihood of profit derived unduly from the distinctive character or reputation - Risk of detriment - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009)))

(2015/C 398/45)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Panrico SA (Esplugues de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: HDN Development Corp. (Frankfort, Kentucky, United States) (represented by: H. Granado Carpenter and M. Polo Carreňo, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 July 2013 (Case R 623/2011-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Panrico SA and HDN Development Corp.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders Panrico SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/39

Judgment of the General Court of 2 December 2015 — Tsujimoto v OHIM — Kenzo (KENZO ESTATE)

(Case T-522/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Community - Word mark KENZO ESTATE - Earlier Community word mark KENZO - Relative ground for refusal - Reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Belated submission of documents - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Partial refusal of registration))

(2016/C 027/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kenzo Tsujimoto (Osaka, Japan) (represented by: A. Wenninger-Lenz, W. von der Osten-Sacken and M. Ring, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Kenzo (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Roncaglia, G. Lazzeretti, F. Rossi and N. Parrotta, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 July 2013 (Case R 1363/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Kenzo and Mr K. Tsujimoto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Kenzo Tsujimoto to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/18

Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2015 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-255/13) (1)

((EAGGF - Guarantee Section - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Flat rate financial corrections - Direct payments - Conditionality - Aid for the processing of citrus fruit - Conditions for accreditation of a paying agency))

(2016/C 007/25)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Italy (represented by: G. Palmieri, Agent, and by B. Tidore and M. Salvatorelli, avvocati dello Stato)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Bianchi and P. Rossi, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision 2013/123/EU of 26 February 2013 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 2013 L 67, p. 20), in so far as it contains flat rate financial corrections concerning expenditure incurred by the Republic of Italy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Republic of Italy to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 178, 22.6.2013.