ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 175/37

Judgment of the General Court of 9 April 2014 — EI du Pont de Nemours v OHIM — Zueco Ruiz (ZYTeL)

(Case T-288/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the figurative mark ZYTeL - Earlier Community word mark and well-known mark within the meaning of Article 6bis of the Paris Convention ZYTEL - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Detriment to the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))

2014/C 175/49

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: EI du Pont de Nemours and Company (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Enrique Zueco Ruiz (Zaragoza, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 March 2012 (Case R 464/2011-2) relating to opposition proceedings between EI du Pont de Nemours and Company and Mr Enrique Zueco Ruiz

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders EI du Pont de Nemours and Company to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 273, 8. 9. 2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 151/18

Judgment of the General Court of 2 April 2014 — Ben Ali v Council

(Case T-133/12) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia - Freezing of funds - Legal basis - Right to property - Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Temporal adjustment of the effects of annulment - Non-contractual liability - Absence of material harm))

2014/C 151/23

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Mehdi Ben Tijani Ben Haj Hamda Ben Haj Hassen Ben Ali (Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, France) (represented by: A. de Saint Remy, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: G. Étienne and S. Kyriakopoulou, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Cujo and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for (i) annulment of Council Decision 2012/50/CFSP of 27 January 2012 amending Decision 2011/72/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia (OJ 2012 L 27, p. 11), in so far as that decision concerns the applicant, and (ii) damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the annex to Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP of 31 January 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Tunisia, as amended by Council Implementing Decision 2011/79/CFSP of 4 February 2011 implementing Decision 2011/72, insofar as that annex has been extended by Council Decision 2012/50/CFSP of 27 January 2012, amending Decision 2011/72, and insofar as it includes the name of Mr Mehdi Ben Tijani Ben Haj Hamda Ben Haj Hassen Ben Ali;

2. Declares that the effects of the annex to Decision 2011/72, as amended by Implementing Decision 2011/79 and extended by Decision 2012/50, with respect to Mr Ben Tijani Ben Haj Hamda Ben Haj Hassen Ben Ali shall be maintained until the expiry of the period for bringing an appeal against the present judgment or, if an appeal is lodged during that period, until such time as that appeal is dismissed;

3. Dismisses the remainder of the action;

4. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by Mr Ben Tijani Ben Haj Hamda Ben Haj Hassen Ben Ali;

5. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 245/10

Judgment of the General Court of 13 June 2014 — Grupo Flexi de León v OHIM (FLEXI)

(Case T-352/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark FLEXI - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 245/13

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Grupo Flexi de León, SA de CV (León, Mexico) (represented by: M. Zarobe, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 May 2012 (Case R 1335/2011-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign FLEXI as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Grupo Flexi de León, SA de CV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 331, 27.10.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 212/27

Judgment of the General Court of 22 May 2014 — BG v Ombudsman

(Case T-406/12 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary measures - Penalty of removal from post without loss of entitlement to a retirement pension - Preliminary investigation pending before a national court when the decision ordering removal from the post was adopted - Equal treatment - Prohibition on dismissal during maternity leave))

2014/C 212/33

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: BG (Strasbourg, France) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Ombudsman (represented by: J. Sant’Anna, Agent, and D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 17 July 2012 in Case F-54/11 BG v Ombudsman, not yet published in the ECR, and seeking that that judgment be set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders BG to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Ombudsman in the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 292/32

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2014 — BSH v OHIM (Wash & Coffee)

(Case T-5/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Wash & Coffee - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Ex officio examination of the facts - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))

2014/C 292/38

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: S. Biagosch, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 November 2011 (Case R 992/2011-4) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Wash & Coffee as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 65, 3.3.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 282/28

Judgment of the General Court of 1 July 2014 — Jyoti Ceramic Industries v OHIM — DeguDent (ZIECON)

(Case T-239/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ZIECON - Earlier Community word mark CERCON - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Examination of the facts of its own motion - Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009))

2014/C 282/36

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Jyoti Ceramic Industries PVT. Ltd (Nashik, India) (represented by: R. Egerer, D. Jochim and A. Kolb, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: DeguDent GmbH (Hanau, Germany) (represented by: W. Blau, T. Hertl and P. Winkler, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 March 2012 (Case R 2546/2010-1) concerning opposition proceedings between DeguDent GmbH and Jyoti Ceramic Industries PVT. Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Jyoti Ceramic Industries PVT. Ltd 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 DeguDent GmbH.

(1) OJ C 209, 14.7.2012.
Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Koscher + Würtz v OHIM — Kirchner & Wilhelm (KW SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS)

(Case T-445/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Community - Figurative mark KW SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS - Earlier national word mark Ka We - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Appeal procedure - Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal - Proof of genuine use of the earlier trade mark - Application submitted to the Opposition Division - Refusal to register the trade mark applied for without prior examination of the condition of genuine use of the earlier trade mark - Error of law - Power to alter decisions))

(2014/C 395/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Koscher + Würtz GmbH (Spaichingen, Germany) (represented by: P. Mes, C. Graf von der Groeben, G. Rother, J. Bühling, A. Verhauwen, J. Künzel, D. Jestaedt, M Bergermann, J. Vogtmeier and A. Kramer, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Kirchner & Wilhelm GmbH + Co. (Asperg, Germany) (represented by: J. Dönch, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 August 2012 (Case R 1675/2011-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Kirchner & Wilhelm GmbH + Co. and Koscher + Würtz GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 August 2012 (Case R 1675/2011-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Kirchner & Wilhelm GmbH + Co. and Koscher + Würtz GmbH;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Koscher + Würtz in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and the General Court;

4. Orders Koscher + Würtz to bear half of the costs it has incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and the General Court.

(1) OJ C 379, 8.12.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 388/11

Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2014 — Central Bank of Iran v Council

(Case T-262/12) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Action for annulment - Lis pendens - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence))

2014/C 388/12

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Central Bank of Iran (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: M. Lester, Barrister)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for, in essence, annulment of (i) Council Decision 2012/35/CFSP of 23 January 2012 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 19, p. 22) and Council Decision 2012/635/CFSP of 15 October 2012 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 282, p. 58), in so far as they listed or maintained the listing, after review, of the applicant in Annex II to Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 39) and (ii) Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning the adoption of restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 of 15 October 2012 implementing Regulation No 267/2012 (OJ 2012 L 282, p. 16), in so far as they listed or maintained the listing, after review, of the applicant in Annex IX to Regulation No 267/2012.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), in so far as it listed Central Bank of Iran in Annex IX thereto;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to bear one half of its own costs and to pay one half of the costs of Central Bank of Iran;

4. Orders Central Bank of Iran to bear one half of its own costs and to pay one half of the costs of the Council.

(1) OJ C 243, 11.8.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 7/31

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2014 — Conrad Electronic v OHIM — British Sky Broadcasting Group and Sky IP International (EuroSky)

(Case T-510/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark EuroSky - Earlier Community word mark SKY - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 007/33)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Conrad Electronic SE (Hirschau, Germany) (represented by: P. Mes, C. Graf von der Groeben, G. Rother, J. Bühling, J. Künzel, D. Jestaedt, M. Bergermann, J. Vogtmeier and A. Kramer, lawyers)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, interveners before the General Court: British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom); and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth) (represented by: J. Barry, Solicitor, R. Heine and M. Plesser, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 September 2012 (Case R 1138/2011-4), concerning opposition proceedings between British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and Sky IP International Ltd, on the one hand, and Conrad Electronic SE, on the other.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Conrad Electronic SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), by British Sky Broadcasting Group plc and by Sky IP International Ltd.

(1) OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 421/34

Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2014 — Bermejo Garde v EESC

(Case T-529/12 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Vacancy notice - Appointment to the post of director - Withdrawal of the appellant’s application - Appointment of another candidate - Actions for annulment - Annulment at first instance of the contested vacancy notice on the grounds that the authority issuing that measure lacked competence - Failure to provide an explicit answer to all of the pleas in law and arguments raised by the parties - Principle of sound administration - Inadmissibility of the forms of order seeking the annulment of decisions taken on the basis of the contested vacancy notice - Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations - Claim for damages - Right to effective judicial protection - Duty of the Civil Service Tribunal to provide a statement of reasons - Whether the state of the proceedings permits final judgment to be given - Dismissal of the claim))

2014/C 421/47

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Moises Bermejo Garde (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (represented by: M. Lernhart, acting as Agent, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 25 September 2012 in Bermejo Garde v EESC (F-51/10, not yet published in the ECR), seeking the partial setting aside of that judgment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 25 September 2012 in Bermejo Garde v EESC (F-51/10) in so far as it rejected the appellant’s claim for damages without providing a statement of reasons;

2. Dismisses the remainder of the appeal;

3. Rejects the claim for damages brought before the Civil Service Tribunal by Mr Moises Bermejo Garde;

4. Orders Mr Bermejo Garde to bear his own costs in relation to the present appeal proceedings;

5. Orders the European and Economic Social Committee (EESC) to bear its own costs at first instance and on appeal and to pay the costs incurred by Mr Bermejo Garde in the proceedings at first instance.

(1) OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 81/13

Judgment of the General Court of 22 January 2015 — Teva Pharma and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe v EMA

(Case T-140/12) (1)

((Medicinal products for human use - Orphan medicinal products - Application for marketing authorisation for the generic version of the orphan medicinal product imatinib - EMA decision refusing to validate the application for marketing authorisation - Market exclusivity))

(2015/C 081/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Teva Pharma BV (Utrecht, Netherlands); and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV (Utrecht) (represented by: D. Anderson, QC, K. Bacon, Barrister, G. Morgan and C. Drew, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by: T. Jabłoński, M. Tovar Gomis and N. Rampal Olmedo, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, P. Mihaylova and M. Šimerdová, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the EMA’s decision of 24 January 2012 refusing to validate the applicants’ application for authorisation to place imatinib Ratiopharm, a generic version of the orphan medicinal product imatinib, on the market, in so far as concerns therapeutic indications for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action.

2) Orders TEVA Pharma BV and Teva Pharmaceuticals Europe BV to bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

3) Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 34/33

Judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2014 — Saint-Gobain Glass Deutschland v Commission

(Case T-476/12) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Documents relating to installations of the applicant situated in Germany and concerned by the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Partial refusal of access - Environmental information - Second sentence of Article 6(1) of Regulation No 1367/2006 - Exception relating to protection of the decision-making process - Documents originating from a Member State - Objection by the Member State - Article 4(3) and (5) of Regulation No 1049/2001))

(2015/C 034/37)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Saint-Gobain Glass Deutschland GmbH (Aix-la-Chapelle, Germany) (represented by: S. Altenschmidt and C. Dittrich, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by P. Costa de Oliveira and H. Krämer, subsequently by H. Krämer and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment, first, of the Commission’s implied decision of 4 September 2012 and, in the alternative, of the Commission’s implied decision of 25 September 2012 and, secondly, of the Commission’s decision of 17 January 2013, refusing to grant full access to the list sent by the Federal Republic of Germany to the Commission, in the framework of the procedure set out in Article 15(1) of Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2011 L 130, p. 1), to the extent that that document contains information relating to certain installations of the applicant, situated in German territory, relating to provisional allocations and activities and capacity levels in relation to carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions between 2005 and 2010, the efficiency of the installations and the annual emission quotas provisionally allocated for the period between 2013 and 2020.

Operative part of the judgment

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Saint-Gobain Glass Deutschland GmbH shall bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 9, 12.1.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/11

Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Republic of Poland v European Commission

(Case T-290/12) (1)

((Agriculture - Common organisation of markets - Processed fruit and vegetables sectors - Aid to producer groups - Limitation on the Union’s financial participation - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations - Obligation to state reasons - Sincere cooperation))

(2015/C 190/12)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: initially by B. Majczyna and M. Szpunar, and subsequently by B. Majczyna and K. Straś, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially by N. Donnelly, B. Schima and D. Milanowska, and subsequently by D. Milanowska and B. Schima, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Article 1(2) to (4), (6), (12) and (13), Article 2(1) to (3), read in conjunction with Article 3 of, and Annexes I and II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 302/2012 of 4 April 2012 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (OJ 2011 L 99, p. 21).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

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

(1) OJ C 250, 18.8.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 118/25

Judgment of the General Court of 26 February 2015 — Orange v Commission

(Case T-385/12) (1)

((State aid - Pensions - Aid for the reform of the arrangements for financing the retirement pensions of civil servants working for France Télécom - Reduction of the compensation to be paid to the State by France Télécom - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market under certain conditions - Advantage - Selective nature - Adverse effect on competition - Rights of the defence))

(2015/C 118/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Orange, formerly France Télécom (Paris, France) (represented by: S. Hautbourg and S. Cochard-Quesson, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, D. Grespan and B. Stromsky, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2012/540/EU of 20 December 2011 on State aid C 25/08 (ex NN 23/08) reform of the arrangements for financing the retirement pensions of civil servants working for France Télécom implemented by the French Republic in favour of France Télécom (OJ 2012, L 279, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Orange to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 311, 13.10.2012.