ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier trade mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks in question – Assessment criteria – Complex mark

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b))

2. Appeals – Pleas in law – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the facts put before the Court of First Instance – Exclusion – Word and figurative mark applied for as a Community trade mark

(Art. 225 EC; EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 51)

3. Community trade mark – Right of the proprietor of a mark to oppose any use likely to impair the guarantee of origin – Right as part of the specific subject-matter of the trade-mark rights – Opposition to registration of a Community trade mark by the proprietor of a national mark regarded as being descriptive in the language of another Member State – Permissible with regard to the principle of the free movement of goods

(Art. 30 EC; Council Regulation No 40/94)

Summary

1. In the context of the application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, the assessment of the similarity between two marks does not amount to taking into consideration only one component of a complex trade mark and comparing it with another mark. On the contrary, such a comparison must be made by examining the marks in question, each considered as a whole. That does not mean that the overall impression created in the mind of the relevant public by a complex trade mark may not, in certain circumstances, be dominated by one or more of its components.

(see para. 32)

2. The appraisal of the facts by the Court of First Instance, which led it to hold that in the case of a word and figurative mark for which registration as a Community trade mark is sought the verbal element constitutes the dominant element of the mark at issue, does not constitute a point of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice on appeal.

(see para. 34)

3. The right attributed to a trade-mark proprietor of preventing any use of the trade mark which is likely to impair the guarantee of origin, which constitutes the essential function of the trade mark, is part of the specific subject-matter of the trade-mark rights, the protection of which may justify derogations from the principle of the free movement of goods.

Consequently, the principle of the free movement of goods does not prohibit either a Member State from registering, as a national trade mark, a sign which, in the language of another Member State, is descriptive of the goods or services concerned, or the proprietor of such a trade mark from opposing, where there is a likelihood of confusion between that national trade mark and a Community trade mark applied for, registration of the latter.

(see paras 41-42)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Appeals — Grounds — Error of law on the part of the Judge hearing the application — Effect on the validity of the interlocutory order — (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 57(2); Council Directive 91/414, Annex I)

2. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Interim measures — Conditions for granting — Prima facie case — Serious and irreparable harm — Balancing of all the interests in issue — Commission's general interest in having Community legislation applied before the decision on the merits — Assessment — (Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Commission Regulation No 3600/92)

Summary

1. Where, in circumstances in which a producer is the only undertaking to support the inclusion of an active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, but another producer concerned, the only producer to have submitted an essentially complete dossier, has withdrawn from the procedure, although the rapporteur Member State agreed to continue the examination procedure based on that dossier, the Judge hearing the application, in his findings as to the serious nature of the pleas put forward, has not ruled out the possibility that that undertaking is not required to provide a complete dossier within a certain time-limit, he cannot, at the same time, without committing an error of law, consider that the fact that it has not produced a complete dossier is a factor against it, in the context of his assessment of the interests at stake. Since the other factors examined by the Judge hearing the application for interim measures in the course of that assessment do not alone justify a conclusion that the result of the assessment is unfavourable to that undertaking and since, moreover, the urgency of the application and the serious nature of the pleas of fact and of law put forward were recognised in the order under appeal, that error of law is sufficient reason to set aside that order.

see paras 12-13

2. In the context of an application for suspension of the operation of a decision concerning the non-inclusion of an active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that active substance, the harm to the Commission's general interest in having Community legislation, in particular Regulation No 3600/92, laying down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414, applied before the decision on the merits must be put into perspective in the assessment of the interests at stake, since other substances referred to by Article 8(2) continue to be authorised for a limited period, without being subject to the scientific assessment laid down by the directive.

see paras 17, 23
Joined Cases C-182/03 R and C-217/03 R





Kingdom of Belgium and Forum 187 ABSL

v

Commission of the European Communities





«(Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a decision – State aid – Existing aid scheme – Tax regime for coordination centres established in Belgium – Transitional measures)»

Order of the President of the Court, 26 June 2003 I - 0000

Summary of the Order

1.. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Provisional measures – Conditions for granting – Prima facie case – Serious and irreparable harm – Balancing of all the interests involved

(Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 83(2))

2.. Applications for interim measures – Criteria for admissibility – Admissibility of the main application – Irrelevance – Limits

(Arts 242 EC and 243 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Art. 83(1))

3.. Actions for annulment – Final decision of the Commission concerning State aid – Action by an association responsible for defending the collective interests of undertakings – Own interest in bringing proceedings to defend its position as a negotiator – Whether admissible

(Art. 230, fourth para., EC)

4.. Applications for interim measures – Suspension of operation of a measure – Conditions for granting – Balancing of all the interests involved – Definition

(Art. 242 EC)

1.

2.

3.

4.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Common customs tariff – Tariff headings – Interpretation – Recourse to classification opinions of the World Customs Organisation – Limits

2. Common customs tariff – Tariff headings – Nicotine patches – Product for therapeutic or prophylactic use – Classification under Heading 3004 of the Combined Nomenclature relating to medicaments

3. Common customs tariff – Classification of goods – Incorrect binding tariff information – Requirement that national courts should ensure that the information is annulled and that information consistent with Community law is issued – Scope

(Art. 10 EC; Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 12(5))

Summary

1. Having regard to the classification of a given product in the Combined Nomenclature drawn up by the Community legislature, a classification opinion issued by the World Customs Organisation on the classification of that product in its harmonised system for the description and coding of commodities has no legally binding force and is no more than an indication assisting in the interpretation of the scope of the various tariff headings of the Combined Nomenclature. If such a classification opinion is contrary to the wording of the heading in the Combined Nomenclature, it must therefore be disregarded.

(see para. 28)

2. The Combined Nomenclature must be interpreted as meaning that nicotine patches which present clearly defined therapeutic or prophylactic characteristics with an effect concentrated on precise functions of the human body and which are individually packaged in aluminium pouches and packed for sale in weekly packs together with instructions are to be classified as ‘medicaments’ under heading 3004.

(see paras 36, 39, 48, operative part 1)

3. If a competent authority has issued incorrect binding tariff information, a national court is required under Article 10 EC to take, within the sphere of its competence, all the measures necessary to ensure that that information is annulled and that new binding tariff information, consistent with Community law, is issued.

In that context, the procedure for and the effects of the decisions adopted by the national court hearing the action fall, within the bounds set by the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, within the ambit of domestic law.

In that regard, it is not contrary to Article 12(5) of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code for a national court to annul a decision of a customs authority which, while it is consistent with a classification opinion of the World Customs Organisation, fails to take account of the Combined Nomenclature drawn up by the Community legislature and to declare that goods must be classified otherwise than in accordance with that classification opinion.

(see para. 57, operative part 2)
Case C-250/03

Giorgio Emanuele Mauri

v

Ministero della Giustizia and Commissione per gli esami di avvocato presso la Corte d’appello di Milano

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Access to the profession of advocate – Rules on the examination for authorisation to practice as a lawyer)

Order of the Court (Second Chamber), 17 February 2005

Summary of the Order

Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom of establishment – Lawyers – Examination determining access to the profession – Composition of the examination committee – Participation of lawyers – Whether permissible – Breach of Articles 81 EC and 82 EC – None

(Arts 43 EC, 81 EC and 82 EC)

Articles 43 EC, 81 EC and 82 EC do not preclude a national law which provides that, in connection with the examination regulating access to the profession of advocate, the examination committee is to be composed of five members appointed by the Minister for Justice, namely two judges, a professor of law and two advocates, the latter being nominated by the National Bar Council on a joint proposal by the bar councils of the district concerned.

As regards Article 43 EC, although an examination for access to the profession of advocate may indeed constitute an obstacle to the freedom of establishment, there is no evidence to suggest that, of itself, the rule relating to the composition of the examination committee constitutes a restriction on freedom of establishment, irrespective of the restriction which might result from the examination itself. In any event, even assuming that the participation of advocates in the State examination committee constitutes in itself a restriction on freedom of establishment, that participation may be justified by the public interest, namely the need to assess as well as possible the aptitude and ability of persons called to practise as advocates, and is suitable for securing the attainment of that objective.

If, furthermore, Articles 81 EC and 82 EC are infringed where a Member State requires or encourages the adoption of agreements, decisions or concerted practices contrary to Article 81 EC or reinforces their effects, require or encourage abuses of a dominant position contrary to Article 82 EC or reinforce the effects of such abuses or, lastly, where it divests its own rules of the character of legislation by delegating to private economic operators responsibility for taking decisions affecting the economic sphere, that is not the case where the Member State concerned delegates to a committee which includes lawyers, responsibility for taking decisions concerning access to the profession of advocate, when it occupies a significant position on the examination committee itself by the presence of two judges, the Ministry of Justice has substantial powers enabling it to supervise each stage of the examination committee’s proceedings and even to intervene in those proceedings if necessary, and, finally, a negative decision by the examination committee may be subject to a legal remedy.

(see paras 30-33, 35, 37, 42-45, 47, operative part)
Case C-85/03





Mavrona & Sia OE

v

Delta Etairia Symmetochon AE





(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Polymeles Protodikio Athinon)

«(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Directive 86/653/EEC – Coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents – Applicability to commission agents)»

Order of the Court (First Chamber), 10 February 2004

Summary of the Order
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom of establishment – Provisions of the Treaty – Scope

(Arts 43 EC and 56 EC)

Summary

A national measure in accordance with which the loan interest paid by a resident capital company to a non-resident shareholder who has a substantial holding in the capital of that company is, under certain conditions, regarded as a covert distribution of profits, taxable in the hands of the resident borrowing company, primarily affects freedom of establishment within the meaning of Article 43 EC et seq.

If it were to be accepted that such a measure has restrictive effects on the free movement of capital, such effects must be seen as an unavoidable consequence of the restriction on freedom of establishment and do not justify an examination of that measure in the light of Articles 56 EC to 58 EC.

Article 43 EC et seq. cannot be relied on in a situation where a company in a non-member country has a shareholding which confers on it a determinative influence on the decisions and the activities of a company in a Member State. The chapter of the Treaty relating to freedom of establishment does not include any provision which extends the scope of its provisions to situations involving nationals of non-member countries who are established outside the European Union, the objective of that chapter being to secure freedom of establishment for nationals of Member States.

(see paras 25, 27-28, operative part)
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy — Protection of the health and safety of workers — Directive 89/391 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the health and safety of workers at work — Directive 93/104 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time — Scope — Operational crews of a public fire service — Included — Application of the rule prescribing the maximum weekly working time — Derogation in exceptional circumstances

(Council Directives 89/391, Art. 2, and 93/104 Arts 1(3) and 6, point 2)

Summary

Article 2 of Directive 89/391 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the health and safety of workers at work and Article 1(3) of Directive 93/104 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time must be interpreted as meaning that:

- the activities carried out by the operational crews of a public fire service normally fall within the scope of those directives so that, in principle, Article 6(2) of Directive 93/104 precludes exceeding the 48-hours ceiling prescribed as the maximum weekly working time, including time on call;

- it is nevertheless possible for such ceiling to be exceeded in exceptional circumstances of such gravity and scale that the aim of ensuring the proper functioning of services essential for the protection of public interests, such as public order, health and safety, must temporarily prevail over the aim of guaranteeing the health and safety of workers assigned to intervention and rescue teams; even in such exceptional situations, however, the aims of Directive 89/391 must be upheld as far as possible.

(see paras 53, 55-57, 61, operative part)
Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 May 2006 – Schmitz

(Case C-291/04)

First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Free movement of persons and services – Workers – Motor vehicle – Provided to worker by employer – Vehicle registered abroad – Employer established in another Member State

Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom of establishment – Restrictions (Art. 43 EC) (see paras 15-20 and operative part)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Tribunal de police de Neufchâteau – Interpretation of Arts 10, 39, 43 and 49 EC – National measure requiring a motor vehicle to be registered in that Member State if it is to be used by a resident even if it has been provided to that resident by the latter’s employer, established in another Member State – Worker bound to his employer by an employment contract and simultaneously performing the functions of shareholder, administrator and person responsible for day-to-day management, or an equivalent function.

Operative part

Article 43 EC precludes national legislation of one Member State, such as the legislation at issue in the main proceedings, which obliges a self-employed person residing in that Member State to register a company vehicle provided to him by the company which employs him and which is established in another Member State, when the company vehicle is neither actually intended to be used permanently in the first Member State nor is in fact used in that way.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Community trade mark

–

Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark

–

Relative grounds for refusal

–

Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 38-47

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 16 March 2005 in Case T-112/03 L’Oréal v OHIM dismissing as unfounded an application brought by the applicant for the Community word mark FLEXI AIR for goods in Class 3 for the annulment of decision R 0396/2001-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 15 January 2003 dismissing the appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division refusing registration of that mark in opposition proceedings brought by the proprietor of the national word marks FLEX for goods in Classes 3 and 34.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders Oréal SA to pay the costs.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Transport

–

Road transport

–

Social provisions (Council Regulation No 3820/85, Art. 10) (see paras 24-28, 30

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Korsholms tingsrätt – Interpretation of Article 10 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport (OJ 1985 L 370, p. 1) – Payments to a wage-earning driver based on distances covered

Operative part

Operative part:

A pay scheme based on distances covered is contrary to Article 10 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport, unless such a scheme is of such a kind as not to endanger road safety. It is for the national court to ascertain, in view of all the circumstances of the case in the main proceedings, whether that is the case.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Community trade mark

–

Procedural provisions (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 52 and 74(1)) (see paras 40-42

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Appeal lodged against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 25 May 2005 in Case T-288/03 TeleTech Holdings v OHIM (intervener: Teletech International SA), in which the Court of First Instance dismissed the appeal against a decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) which had upheld in part an application for a declaration of invalidity regarding the Community trade mark ‘TELETECH GLOBAL VENTURES’ brought by Teletech International SA as holder of the national trade mark ‘TELETECH INTERNATIONAL’.

Operative part

Operative part:

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. TeleTech Holdings, Inc. is ordered to pay the costs.
Keywords



Keywords

Appeal – Grounds – Incorrect assessments of the facts – Inadmissible – Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the evidence – Excluded except in cases of distortion (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58) (see paras 45-46)

2. Procedure – Measures of inquiry (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 66(1) (see para. 47)

3. Appeal – Grounds – Inadequate or contradictory grounds – Whether admissible (Art. 225 EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58) (see para. 53)

4. Procedure – Measures of organisation of procedure (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Arts 49 and 64(3)(d)) (see paras 67-68)

5. Appeal – Grounds – Ground put forward for the first time in the appeal – Inadmissible (Rules of Procedure of the Court, Arts 42(2), and 118) (see para. 99)
Order of the Court (Third Chamber) of 16 February 2006 – Plato Plastik Robert Frank

(Case C-26/05)

Second subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Directive 94/62/EC – Packaging and packaging waste – Concepts of packaging manufacturers and packaging materials manufacturers – Manufacturer of plastic carrier bags

1. Environment – Packaging and packaging waste – Directive 94/62 (European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62, Art. 3(1) and (11)) (see para. 29, operative part 1)

2. Environment – Packaging and packaging waste – Directive 94/62 (European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62) (see para. 37, operative part 2)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Landesgericht Korneuburg – Interpretation of Article 3 of European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste (OJ 1994 L 365, p. 10) – Concepts of ‘producers of grouped, sales or transport packaging’ and ‘suppliers of packaging materials’ – Manufacturer of plastic carrier bags

Operative part:

The Court:

1. Declares that Article 3(1) and (11) of European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste must be interpreted as meaning that a manufacturer of packaging is not necessarily the party associating or bringing together goods and the product intended for packaging. A manufacturer of plastic carrier bags supplied to customers free of charge or for payment in shops must be considered a manufacturer of packaging;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Procedure – Costs – Taxation (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 73(b)) (see paras 33-35)

2. Procedure – Costs – Taxation – Recoverable costs – Involvement of more than one lawyer (Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 73(b)) (see paras 47-48)

Subject of the case

Re:

Article 74 of the Rules of Procedure – Action on taxation of costs following judgment of the Court of 18 July 2008.

Operative part

Re:

The total amount of the costs to be reimbursed by the Commission of the European Communities to Industrias Químicas del Vallés SA is fixed at EUR 255 000.