ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/16

Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — France v Commission

(Case T-549/13) (1)

((Agriculture - Export refund - Poultry meat - Fixing the refund at EUR 0 - Obligation to state reasons - Possibility for the Commission to confine itself to a standard set of reasoning - Commission’s standard practice in fixing refunds - Article 164(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 - Non-exhaustive nature of the criteria laid down))

(2016/C 078/25)

Language of the case: French

Parties

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

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Bianchi and K. Skelly, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 689/2013 of 18 July 2013 fixing the export refunds on poultry meat (OJ 2013 L 196, p. 13).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 367, 14.12.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/31

Judgment of the General Court of 4 December 2015 — Sarafraz v Council

(Case T-273/13) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran - Freezing of funds - Restrictions on the entry into and transit through European Union territory - Legal base - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Error of assessment - Ne bis in idem - Freedom of expression - Freedom of the media - Freedom to choose an occupation - Free movement - Right to property))

(2016/C 027/35)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Mohammad Sarafraz (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: initially, T. Walter, then by J.M. Viñals Camallonga, L. Barriola Urruticoechea and J.L. Iriarte Ángel, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P Hix and Á. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado, acting as agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Stiftung Organisation Justice for Iran (Amsterdam, the Netherlands) (represented by: initially, G. Pulles, then by R. Marx, lawyers)

Re:

Application for the annulment in part, first, of Council Decision 2013/124/CSFP of 11 March 2013 amending Decision 2011/235/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran (OJ 2013 L 68, p. 57), second, of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 206/2013 of 11 March 2013 implementing Article 12(1) of Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Iran (OJ 2013 L 68, p. 9), third, of Council Decision 2014/205/CFSP of 10 April 2014 amending Decision 2011/235/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran (OJ 2014 L 109, p. 25), fourth, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 371/2014 of 10 April 2014 implementing Article 12(1) of Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Iran (OJ 2014 L 109, p. 9), fifth, Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/555 of 7 April 2015 amending Decision 2011/235/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran (OJ 2015 L 92, p. 91), and, sixth, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/548 of 7 April 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Iran (OJ 2015 L 92, p. 1), in so far as those measures concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders Mohammad Sarafraz to pay his own costs and those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders Stiftung Organisation Justice for Iran to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 May 2016 — Mikhalchanka v Council

(Case T-693/13) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Belarus - Freezing of funds and economic resources - Restrictions on entry into, and transit through, the territory of the European Union - Retention of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Journalist - Rights of defence - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment))

(2016/C 222/13)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Aliaksei Mikhalchanka (Minsk, Belarus) (represented by: M. Michalauskas, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and F. Naert, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2013 L 288, p. 69) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus (OJ 2013 L 288, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court hereby:

1. Dismisses the application of the Council of the European Union for a ruling that there is no need to adjudicate;

2. Annuls, in so far as they concern Mr Aliaksei Mikhalchanka: — Council Decision 2013/534/CFSP of 29 October 2013 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus; — Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1054/2013 of 29 October 2013 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus;

3. Orders the Council to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Mikhalchanka.

(1) OJ C 93, 29.3.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 98/29

Judgment of the General Court of 2 February 2016 — Benelli Q.J. Srl v OHIM — Demharter (MOTO B)

(Case T-169/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark MOTO B - Earlier non-registered national figurative marks MOTOBI - Relative ground for refusal - Evidence that the earlier non-registered marks are well known - Article 8(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 6bis of the Paris Convention - Evidence submitted in support of the opposition after the expiry of the period set for that purpose - Failure to take account thereof - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Provision to the contrary - Circumstances precluding additional or supplementary evidence from being taken into account - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rules 19 and 20 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - Rule 50(1), third subparagraph, of Regulation No 2868/95 - First sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 098/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Benelli Q.J. Srl (Pesaro, Italy) (represented by: P. Lukácsi and B. Bozóki, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially F. Mattina and subsequently P. Bullock, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Demharter GmbH (Dillingen, Germany) (represented by: A. Kohn, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 January 2013 (Case R 95/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Benelli Q.J. Srl and Demharter GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Benelli Q.J. Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 147, 25.5.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/23

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — K Chimica v ECHA

(Case T-675/13) (1)

((REACH - Fee for registration of a substance - Reduction granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises - Error in declaration relating to the size of the enterprise - Recommendation 2003/361/EC - Decision imposing an administrative charge - Determination of an enterprise’s size - Power of the ECHA))

(2016/C 392/26)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: K Chimica Srl (Mirano, Italy) (represented by: R. Buizza and M. Rota, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented initially by M. Heikkilä, A. Iber, E. Bigi and E. Maurage and J.-P. Trnka, and subsequently by Heikkilä, Bigi, Maurage and Trnka, acting as Agents, and C. Garcia Molyneux, lawyer)

Re:

Application, first, under Article 263 TFEU, for annulment of Decision SME(2013) 3665 of the ECHA of 15 October 2013, stating that the applicant failed to adduce the necessary evidence to receive a reduction of the fee for small enterprises and imposes an administrative charge on it, second, requesting that the applicant be granted small enterprise status and that the corresponding fee be applied to it, and third, under Article 263 TFEU, for annulment of the invoices issued by the ECHA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Decision SME(2013) 3665 of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) of 15 October 2013;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the ECHA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by K Chimica Srl.

(1) OJ C 45, 15.2.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 305/26

Judgment of the General Court of 5 July 2016 — Future Enterprises v EUIPO — McDonald’s International Property (MACCOFFEE)

(Case T-518/13) (1)

((European Union trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union word mark MACCOFFEE - Earlier European Union word mark McDONALD’S - Article 53(1)(a) and Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Family of marks - Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark - Declaration of invalidity))

(2016/C 305/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Future Enterprises Pte Ltd (Singapore, Singapore) (represented initially by B. Hitchens, J. Olsen, R. Sharma, M. Henshall, Solicitors, and R. Tritton, Barrister, and subsequently by B. Hitchens, J. Olsen, R. Tritton and E. Hughes-Jones, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: McDonald’s International Property Co. Ltd (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: C. Eckhartt, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 June 2013 (Case R 1178/2012-1) relating to cancellation proceedings between McDonald’s International Property Co. and Future Enterprises.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Future Enterprises Pte Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 65/33

Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2015 — Melt Water v OHIM (MELT WATER Original)

(Case T-69/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community figurative mark MELT WATER Original - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 065/46)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Parties

Applicant: Research and Production Company ‘Melt Water’ UAB (Klaipėda, Lithuania) (represented by: V. Viešūnaitė, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2013 (Case R 494/2013-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign MELT WATER Original as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Research and Production Company ‘Melt Water’ UAB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/11

Judgment of the General Court of 21 May 2015 — Evyap v OHIM — Megusta Trading (nuru)

(Case T-56/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a Community figurative mark representing a wiggly line - Earlier national and international word and figurative marks DURU - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 221/15)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evyap Sabun Yağ Gliserin Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: J. Güell Serra, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Megusta Trading GmbH (Zurich, Switzerland)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 November 2013 (Case R 1861/2012-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Evyap Sabun Yağ Gliserin Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. and Megusta Trading GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Evyap Sabun Yağ Gliserin Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/15

Judgment of the General Court of 22 April 2015 — Rezon v OHIM — mobile.international (mobile.de proMotor)

(Case T-337/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark mobile.de proMotor - Prior national figurative mark mobile - Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity - Article 165(4)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 190/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Rezon OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: P. Kanchev and T. Ignatova, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: mobile.international GmbH (Kleinmachnow, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 February 2014 (Case R 950/2013-1) concerning invalidity proceedings between Rezon OOD and mobile.international GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Rezon OOD to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 302/52

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — Rouffaud v EEAS

(Case T-457/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Auxiliary member of contract staff - Reclassification of contract - Rule of correspondence between the application and the complaint - Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials))

(2015/C 302/67)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Thierry Rouffaud (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: initially M. de Abreu Caldas, D. de Abreu Caldas and J. N. Louis, then J. N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt and M. Silva, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 9 April 2014 in Rouffaud v EEAS (F-59/13, ECR-SC, EU:F:2014:49), and seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Sets aside the judgment of European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 9 April 2014 in Rouffaud v EEAS (F-59/13, ECR-SC, EU:F:2014:49);

2. Refers the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal;

3. Reserves the costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 262/25

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2015 — Best-Lock (Europe) v OHIM — Lego Juris (Shape of a toy figure)

(Case T-395/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Three-dimensional Community trade mark - Shape of a toy figure - Absolute grounds for refusal - Sign consisting exclusively of the shape which results from the nature of the goods themselves - Sign consisting exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result - Article 7(1)(e)(i) and (ii) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 262/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Best-Lock (Europe) Ltd (Colne, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Becker, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Lego Juris A/S (Billund, Denmark) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 March 2014 (Case R 1695/2013-4), concerning invalidity proceedings between Best-Lock (Europe) Ltd and Lego Juris A/S.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action;

2) Orders Best-Lock (Europe) Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 315, 15.9.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/34

Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — Laverana v OHIM (BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION)

(Case T-568/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community figurative mark BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 354/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Laverana GmbH & Co. KG (Wennigsen, Germany) (represented by: J. Wachinger, M. Zöbisch and D. Chatterjee, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 May 2014 (Case R 120/2014-4) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign BIO FLUIDE DE PLANTE PROPRE FABRICATION as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Laverana GmbH & Co. KG to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 361, 13.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/32

Judgment of the General Court of 10 September 2015 — EE v OHIM (Representation of white dots on a blue background)

(Case T-94/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for a Community figurative mark representing white dots on a blue background - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 354/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 November 2013 (Case R 495/2013-1) relating to an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing white dots on a blue background.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders EE Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 389/48

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2015 — Klement v OHIM — Bullerjan (Form of an oven)

(Case T-211/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Three-dimensional Community mark - Form of an oven - Genuine use of a mark - Article 15(1)(a) and Article 51 (1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Nature of use of the mark - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character))

(2015/C 389/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Toni Klement (Dippoldiswalde, Germany) (represented by: J. Weiser and A. Grohmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Bullerjan GmbH (Isernhagen-Kirchhorst, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 January 2014 (Case R 927/2013-1), relating to revocation proceedings between Mr Toni Klement and Bullerjan GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Toni Klement to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 389/47

Judgment of the General Court of 25 September 2015 — Bopp v OHIM (Representation of a green octagonal frame)

(Case T-209/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for figurative Community mark representing a green octagonal frame - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 389/51)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Carsten Bopp (Glashütten, Germany) (represented by: C. Russ, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by: A. Pohlmann, and subsequently by: S. Hanne, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 January 2014 (Case R 1276/2013-1) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a green octagonal frame as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Carsten Bopp to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 398/42

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2015 — Monster Energy v OHIM — Balaguer (icexpresso + energy coffee)

(Case T-61/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the figurative Community trade mark icexpresso + energy coffee - Earlier Community word marks X-PRESSO MONSTER, HAMMER M X-PRESSO MONSTER ESPRESSO + ENERGY and MIDNIGHT M X-PRESSO MONSTER ESPRESSO + ENERGY - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 398/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Luis Yus Balaguer (Movera, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 November 2013 (Case R 821/2013-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Monster Energy Company and Mr Luis Yus Balaguer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Monster Energy Company to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

(1) OJ C 129, 28.4.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 398/52

Judgment of the General Court of 8 October 2015 — Société des produits Nestlé v OHIM (NOURISHING PERSONAL HEALTH)

(Case T-336/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - International registration designating the European Community - Word mark NOURISHING PERSONAL HEALTH - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation on OHIM to examine the facts of its own motion - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2015/C 398/66)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, A. Lambrecht and S. Cobet-Nüse, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 March 2014 (Case R 149/2013-4) concerning the international registration designating the European Community of the word mark NOURISHING PERSONAL HEALTH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Société des produits Nestlé SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.