ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 269/15

Order of the General Court of 7 June 2017 — De Masi v Commission

(Case T-11/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - No confirmatory decision - Request for access on the basis of interinstitutional cooperation under Article 230 TFEU - Documents relating to the work of the ‘Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation)’ set up by the Council - Act not amenable to review - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2017/C 269/21)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Fabio De Masi (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Fischer-Lescano, Professor)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Erlbacher, J. Baquero Cruz and A. Buchet, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment, first, of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 9 December 2015 responding to the request for access to the documents of the ‘Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation)’, submitted by the applicant on the basis of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), and, secondly, of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 9 November 2015 responding to the request for access to the same documents submitted by the Chairman of the European Parliament’s Special Committee on Tax Rulings and Other Measures Similar in Nature or Effect.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.

2. Mr Fabio De Masi shall bear his own costs.

(1) OJ C 78, 29.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 402/34

Order of the General Court of 28 September 2017 — Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis v Commission

(Case T-207/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - Measures never having been adopted - Request for a declaration that there is no need to adjudicate - Request that the application be interpreted as referring to a measure other than the contested measures - Dismissal - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2017/C 402/45)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Delaude and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of an alleged exclusion decision taken against the applicant and of an alleged decision to register the applicant and to activate the exclusion warning against the applicant in the Early Warning System (EWS) or in the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES)

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

2. The Commission shall bear its own costs in the main proceedings and in the application for interim measures, and shall pay two thirds of the costs of Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis in those proceedings.

3. Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis shall bear one third of its own costs in those proceedings.

(1) OJ C 251,11.7.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 382/61

Order of the General Court of 13 September 2017 — Omnicom International Holdings v EUIPO — eBay (DATABAY)

(Case T-394/16) (1)

(2017/C 382/76)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Eight Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 94/25

Order of the General Court of 16 January 2018 — Pebagua v Commission

(Case T-715/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - Environment - Protection against invasive alien species - Prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species - Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1141 - Adoption of a list of invasive alien species of concern to the European Union - Inclusion of the Procambarus clarkii species - No individual concern - Regulatory act entailing implementing measures - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2018/C 094/33)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Asociación de la pesca y acuicultura del entorno de Doñana y del Bajo Guadalquívir (Pebagua) (Isla Mayor, Spain) (represented by: A. Uceda Sosa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes and E. Sanfrutos Cano, Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1141 of 13 July 2016 adopting a list of invasive alien species of Union concern pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2016 L 189, p. 4).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Asociación de la pesca y acuicultura del entorno de Doñana y del Bajo Guadalquívir (Pebagua) shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 441, 28.11.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 42/26

Order of the General Court of 27 November 2017 — Schwenk Zement v Commission

(Case T-907/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - Competition - Mergers - Market for grey cement in Croatia - Decision to initiate the detailed examination phase in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 - Act not open to challenge - Preparatory act - Inadmissibility))

(2018/C 042/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Schwenk Zement KG (Ulm, Germany) (represented by: U. Soltész, M. Raible and G. Wecker, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, H. Leupold and T. Vecchi, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought under Article 270 TFEU, seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(206) 6591 final of 10 October 2016, to initiate the detailed examination phase in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, seeking to assess the compatibility with the internal market of the acquisition of control of Cemex Hungária Épitöanyagok Kft. and Cemex Hrvatska d.d. by HeidelbergCement AG and Schwenk Zement through Duna-Dráva Cement Kft.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Schwenk Zement KG is ordered to bear its own costs as well as those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 63, 27.2.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/28

Order of the General Court of 9 April 2018 — Make up for ever v EUIPO — L’Oréal (MAKE UP FOR EVER)

(Case T-320/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for a declaration of invalidity - Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate))

(2018/C 190/50)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Make up for ever (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Caron, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Bonne and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: L’Oréal SA (Paris) (represented by: S. Micallef, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 (Case R 985/2015-5) relating to invalidity proceedings between L’Oréal and Make up for ever.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Make up for ever and L’Oréal SA shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 296, 16.8.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 123/21

Order of the General Court of 7 February 2018 — AEIM and Kazenas v Commission

(Case T-436/16) (1)

((Action for damages - Limitation - No proof of loss - Action manifestly bound to fail))

(2018/C 123/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Application électronique industrielle moderne (AEIM) (Algrange, France) and Philippe Kazenas (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: B. Wizel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: S. Delaude and S. Lejeune, and subsequently by S. Delaude, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation in respect of the loss allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of acts of corruption committed by a servant of the Commission.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Application électronique industrielle moderne (AEIM) and Mr Philippe Kazenas shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 371, 10.10.2016.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 30 January 2019 — Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor v Commission

(Case T-149/16) (1)

((Action for annulment - Financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility - Transport sector for the period 2014-2020 - Lis pendens - Inadmissibility))

(2019/C 103/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor BV (Amsterdam, the Netherlands) (represented by: initially by P. Glazener, then by Y. de Vries and D. Coumans and finally by Y. de Vries and J. de Kok, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Hottiaux and J. Samnadda, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision C(2015) 5274 final of 31 July 2015 establishing the list of proposals selected for receiving EU financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Transport sector following the calls for proposals launched on 11 September 2014 based on the Multi-Annual Work Programme.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.

2. Spliethoff’s Bevrachtingskantoor BV and the European Commission shall bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 27 September 2018 — HS v EIB

(Case T-589/16)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Transfer of pension rights - Amount transferred - Non-contractual liability - Pre-litigation procedure - Conciliation procedure before the EIB - Reasonable period - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2018/C 427/87)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: HS (represented by: A. Senes and L. Payot, then A. Senes, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: T. Gilliams, G. Nuvoli, P. Kijver and G. Faedo initially, then T. Gilliams, P. Kijver and G. Faedo, Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application, on the basis of Article 270 TFEU, seeking compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of errors committed by the EIB in the transfer of the applicant’s pension rights from the national pension scheme to the EIB pension scheme.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 6 May 2021 — Miranda Garcia v European Court of Justice

(Case T-547/16) (1)

(2021/C 252/54)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 190, 8.6.2015 (case originally registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under number F-53/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 8 July 2019 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — Amedei (For you)

(Case T-480/16) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark For you - Decision to reject the application for registration based on absolute grounds for refusal - No longer any locus standi - No need to adjudicate)

(2019/C 328/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: A. Berger and M. Wolter, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Amedei Srl (Pontedera, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2016 (Case R 851/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Amedei and Lidl Stiftung.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Each party shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 178/34

Order of the President of the General Court of 6 February 2017 — Bender v Parliament

(Case T-30/17)

(2017/C 178/54)

Language of the case: German

The President of the General Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/41

Order of the General Court of 14 June 2017 — Heineken Romania v EUIPO — Lénárd (Csíki Sör)

(Case T-83/17) (1)

(2017/C 256/49)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 178/23

Order of the President of the General Court of 23 March 2017 — Kampete v Council

(Case T-140/17 R)

((Application for interim measures - Restrictive measures - Democratic Republic of the Congo - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency))

(2017/C 178/33)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Ilunga Kampete (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: O. Okito and A. Ouannès, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU, seeking suspension of the operation of Council Regulation (EU) 2016/2230 of 12 December 2016 amending Council 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 2016 L 336 I, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 369/19

Order of the President of the General Court of 3 July 2017 — Proximus v Council

(Case T-117/17 R)

((Interim measures - Public procurement - Negotiated procedure - Application for interim measures - No urgency))

(2017/C 369/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Proximus SA/NV (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: B. Schutyser, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Jaume and S. Cholakova, acting as Agents, and by P. de Bandt, P. Teerlinck and M. Gherghinaru, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for the grant of interim measures, (i), suspending implementation of the decision of the Council to award the framework contract to another tenderer and, (ii), suspending the implementation of the framework contract concluded between the Council and the successful tenderer.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 293/41

Order of the General Court of 20 July 2017 — GY v Commission

(Case T-203/17) (1)

(2017/C 293/53)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 195, 19.6.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 52/31

Order of the General Court of 14 December 2017 — Rogesa v Commission

(Case T-475/17) (1)

((Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Documents concerning an installation producing a mixture of pellets and sintered ore - Implied refusal of access - Express decision adopted before the action was brought - Application for an order that there is no need to adjudicate - Interest in bringing proceedings - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2018/C 052/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Rogesa Roheisengesellschaft Saar mbH (Dillingen, Germany) (represented by: S. Altenschmidt and A. Sitzer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Krämer, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking, primarily, annulment of the Commission’s implied decision of 20 June 2017 and, in the alternative, of the decision of 11 July 2017 refusing to grant access to the document Ares (2017) 1684109 of 2 November 2009 and the document Ares (2017) 1685639 of 29 November 2009.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.

2. Rogesa Roheisengesellschaft Saar mbH and the European Commission shall bear their own respective costs.

(1) OJ C 318, 25.9.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 437/42

Order of the General Court of 25 October 2017 — Franmax v EUIPO — R. Seelig & Hille (her-bea)

(Case T-97/17) (1)

(2017/C 437/50)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 112, 10.4.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 182/22

Order of the General Court of 21 March 2018 — Eco-Bat Technologies and Others v Commission

(Case T-361/17) (1)

((Action for annulment - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for car battery recycling - Decision correcting a decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and imposing fines - Period within which an action must be brought - Point from which time starts to run - Delay - Inadmissibility))

(2018/C 182/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Eco-Bat Technologies Ltd (Matlock, United Kingdom), Berzelius Metall GmbH (Braubach, Germany), Société de traitements chimiques des métaux (STCM) (Bazoches-les-Gallerandes, France) (represented by: M. Brealey QC, I. Vandenborre and S. Dionnet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. van Schaik, G. Conte, I. Rogalski and J. Szczodrowski, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 900 final of 8 February 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU (Case AT.40018 — Car battery recycling), as corrected by Commission Decision C(2017) 2223 final of 6 April 2017, and, second, a reduction of the amount of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Eco-Bat Technologies Ltd, Berzelius Metall GmbH and Société de traitements chimiques des métaux (STCM) shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 318, 25.9.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 123/27

Order of the General Court of 7 February 2018 — Alfa Laval Flow Equipment (Kunshan) v Commission

(Case T-204/17) (1)

(2018/C 123/34)

Language of the case: Swedish

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 161, 22.5.2017.
Case T-587/17: Order of the General Court of 20 June 2018 — Unigroup v EUIPO — Pronova Laboratories (nailicin) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark nailicin — Earlier Benelux word mark NAILCLIN — Relative ground for refusal — Copy of the certificate of registration of the earlier mark — Rule 19(2)(a)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7(2)(a)(ii) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430) — Taking into account of a document submitted in conjunction with the notice of opposition — Rule 19(4) Regulation No 2868/95 (now Article 7(5) of Delegated Regulation 2017/1430) — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

Order of the General Court of 20 June 2018 — Unigroup v EUIPO — Pronova Laboratories (nailicin)

(Case T-587/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark nailicin — Earlier Benelux word mark NAILCLIN — Relative ground for refusal — Copy of the certificate of registration of the earlier mark — Rule 19(2)(a)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7(2)(a)(ii) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430) — Taking into account of a document submitted in conjunction with the notice of opposition — Rule 19(4) Regulation No 2868/95 (now Article 7(5) of Delegated Regulation 2017/1430) — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)’

Parties

Applicant: Unigroup ApS (Lyngby, Denmark) (represented by: M. Rijsdijk, 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, intervener before the General Court: Pronova Laboratories BV (Muiden, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Wertwijn, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 June 2017 (Case R 2359/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Pronova Laboratories and Unigroup.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Unigroup ApS is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Pronova Laboratories BV.

( 1 ) OJ C 347, 16.10.2017.
Case T-812/17: Order of the General Court of 15 May 2018 — Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament (Action for annulment — Public service contracts — Tender procedure — Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels — Rejection of the applicants’ tender and award of the contract to another tenderer — Withdrawal of the contested act — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)

Order of the General Court of 15 May 2018 — Seco Belgium and Vinçotte v Parliament

(Case T-812/17) ( 1 )

‛(Action for annulment — Public service contracts — Tender procedure — Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels — Rejection of the applicants’ tender and award of the contract to another tenderer — Withdrawal of the contested act — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)’

Parties

Applicant: Seco Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) and Vinçotte (Vilvoorde, Belgium) (represented by: A. Delvaux and R. Simar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented initially by P. López-Carceller and Z. Nagy, and subsequently by Z. Nagy and B. Simon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU, seeking annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 1 December 2017 to reject the applicants’ tender in the tender procedure 06D 20/2017/M005 entitled ‘Assignments to perform inspections and provide technical opinions in the context of construction works, projects and purchases at the European Parliament in Brussels’ and to award the contract to another tenderer.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The European Parliament is ordered to pay the costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.

( 1 ) OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.