ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 302/68

Action brought on 17 July 2015 — PAL-Bullermann v OHMI — Symaga (PAL)

(Case T-397/15)

(2015/C 302/85)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: PAL-Bullermann GmbH (Friesoythe-Markhausen, Germany) (represented by: J. Eberhardt, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Symaga, SA (Villarta de San Juan, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark ‘PAL’— Community trade mark registration No 690 750

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 May 2015 in Case R 1626/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— alter the contested decision so that the application for revocation is upheld in its entirety;

— impose the costs to the defendant and the other party.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;
—

The applicant puts forward that in order to ensure compliance with Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the criteria for listing in the Decision and Regulation must be interpreted consistently with the right to freedom of expression. According to the applicant, the criterion that a person ‘actively supports’ Russian government policies in relation to Ukraine must require the person to have a greater degree of influence over the relevant policies than merely expressing a view in a journalistic context. The applicant, so he claims, is a journalist and the director of a media company only and thus does not have the requisite influence or concrete impact on, and responsibility, for the situation in Ukraine. In fact, the applicant has never expressed support for ‘the deployment of Russian forces in Ukraine’ as the Council claims.
1.

First plea in law, alleging an error in law on behalf of the Civil Service Tribunal with regards to the scope of the right to be heard. — Without relying on any case-law nor providing specific reasoning, the Civil Service Tribunal adopted an extensive interpretation of the scope of the right to be heard, applicable not only to allegations made vis-à-vis an individual, but also to the consequences ascribed to the behavior of that individual. Besides, the approach taken by the Civil Service Tribunal as to the scope of the right to be heard is contradicted by its very findings in the contested judgment.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 302/61

Action brought on 30 June 2015 — Modas Cristal v OHIM — Zorlu Tekstil Ürünleri Pazarlama (KRISTAL)

(Case T-345/15)

(2015/C 302/76)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Modas Cristal, SL (Santa Lucía, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Zorlu Tekstil Ürünleri Pazarlama Anonim Sirketi (Denizli, Turkey)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘KRISTAL’ — Application for registration No 10 574 473

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 24 April 2015 in Case R 341/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision on the ground that the use of the Spanish mark No 2 569 089 ‘MODAS CRISTAL’ for services in Class 35 has been demonstrated and that the new Community trade mark application is incompatible with the Spanish marks No 2 569 089 ‘MODAS CRISTAL’, for services in Class 35, and No 2 763 821 ‘home CRISTAL’, for goods in Class 24;

— order OHIM and any interveners supporting it to pay the costs.

Plea in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 320/43

Action brought on 3 August 2015 — Indecopi v OHIM — Synergy Group (PISCO SOUR)

(Case T-447/15)

(2015/C 320/60)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual (Indecopi) (San Borja, Peru) (represented by: M. Pomares Caballero and A. Pomares Caballero, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Synergy Group sp. z o.o. (Wrocław, Poland)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘PISCO SOUR’ — Application for registration No 1016 7682

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 June 2015 in Case R 1292/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— alter the contested decision, by declaring that the requirements for the application of the relative ground for refusal laid down in Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009 are met in the present case; and

— order OHIM to pay its own costs and those of the applicant.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of Article 23 of Regulation No 110/2008;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 320/38

Action brought on 30 July 2015 — Flowil International Lighting v OHIM — Lorimod Prod Com (Silvania Food)

(Case T-430/15)

(2015/C 320/55)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Flowil International Lighting (Holding) BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Güell Serra, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: SC Lorimod Prod Com, Srl (Simleul Silvaniei, Romania)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Silvania Food’ — Application for registration No 11 042 082

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 May 2015 in Case R 616/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 328/15

Action brought on 28 July 2015 — U-R LAB/OHIM (THE DINING EXPERIENCE)

(Case T-422/15)

(2015/C 328/14)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: U-R LAB (Paris, France) (represented by: G. Barbaut, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘THE DINING EXPERIENCE’ — Application for registration No 12 587 697

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 May 2015 in Case R 2541/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul and alter the contested decision;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Plea in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 328/16

Action brought on 29 July 2015 — Schräder v CPVO — Hansson (Seimora)

(Case T-425/15)

(2015/C 328/16)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Ralf Schräder (Lüdinghausen, Germany) (represented by: T. Leidereiter, lawyer)

Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Jørn Hansson (Søndersø, Denmark)

Details of the proceedings before the CPVO

Proprietor of the Community plant variety right at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community plant variety right at issue: Community variety EU 8536 ‘SEIMORA’

Procedure before the CPVO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Board of Appeal of the CPVO of 24 February 2015 in Case A003/2010

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision and annul the plant variety right in Community variety SEIMORA with effect from 4 October 2005;

— in the alternative, annul the contested decision;

— order the CPVO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of Article 48(4) of Regulation No 2100/94;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 337/28

Action brought on 20 July 2015 — Thun 1794 v OHIM — Adekor (graphical symbols)

(Case T-420/15)

(2015/C 337/29)

Language in which the application was lodged: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Thun 1794 a.s. (Nová Role, Czech Republic) (represented by: F. Steidl, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Adekor s.r.o. (Loket, Czech Republic)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Design at issue: Community design No 000840400-0001

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 April 2015 in Case R 1465/2014-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of essential procedural rules;

— Infringement of Article 25(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 337/37

Action brought on 19 August 2015 — European Food v OHIM — Société des Produits Nestlé (FITNESS)

(Case T-476/15)

(2015/C 337/42)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: European Food SA (Drăgăneşti, Romania) (represented by: I. Speciac, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Société des Produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘FITNESS’ — Community trade mark No 2 470 326

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 June 2015 in Case R 2542/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision and remit the case to the Office in order to issue a decision in compliance with the Court’s ruling;

— as a subsidiary, alter the contested decision and cancel CTM Fitness no 2470326;

— order OHIM to pay the costs generated by the current proceedings.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of rule 37(b)(vi), rule 50(1) of Regulation No 2868/95 and Article 76 of Regulation No 207/2009;

— Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 337/44

Action brought on 21 August 2015 — SGP Rechtsanwälte v OHIM — Verlag Friedrich Oetinger (tolino)

(Case T-490/15)

(2015/C 337/49)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: SGP Rechtsanwälte Hero, Langbein, Zwecker PartGmbB (Munich, Germany) (represented by: K. Köklü, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Verlag Friedrich Oetinger GmbH (Hamburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: The applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘tolino’ — Application for registration No 11 651 288

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2015 in Case R 2042/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Plea in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/49

Action brought on 7 September 2015 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v OHIM (Limbic® Sales)

(Case T-517/15)

(2015/C 354/60)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult AG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze und G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Limbic® Sales’ — Application for registration No 12 316 493

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 June 2015 in Case R 1972/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision concerning the application for registration of the Community trade mark 012 316 493 Limbic® Sales;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

— Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) Regulation No 207/2009;

— Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 354/40

Action brought on 27 August 2015 — Sociedad agraria de transformación no 9982 Montecitrus v OHIM — Spanish Oranges (MOUNTAIN CITRUS SPAIN)

(Case T-495/15)

(2015/C 354/49)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Sociedad agraria de transformación no 9982 Montecitrus (Pulpí, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Spanish Oranges, SL (Castellón, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘MOUNTAIN CITRUS SPAIN’ — Application for registration No 11 290 293

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 June 2015 in Case R 871/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— set aside the contested decision;

— refuse the application of the trademark at issue for all goods covered in classes 29 and 31;

— order the Intervener to pay the costs.

Plea(s) in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 371/43

Action brought on 22 September 2015 — Pi-Design v OHIM — Nestlé (PRESSO)

(Case T-545/15)

(2015/C 371/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Pi-Design AG (Triengen, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Apelt, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the mark ‘PRESSO’ — International registration designating the European Union No 1 093 132

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 July 2015 in Case R 428/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision;

— order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law
1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union The applicants claim that they were discriminated against solely because of their nationality and in contravention of the prohibition under Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, since there appear to be no substantive grounds for the ban pronounced. Moreover, in the view of the applicants, their presence on the premises of the European Parliament did not pose a risk to security and could not adversely affect the Parliament’s functioning.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/46

Action brought on 15 July 2015 — J & Joy v OHIM — Joy-Sportswear (J&JOY)

(Case T-389/15)

(2015/C 381/56)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: J & Joy SA (Waremme, Belgium) (represented by: A. Maqua and C. Pirenne, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Joy-Sportswear GmbH (Ottensoos, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘J&JOY’ — Application for registration No 11 411 808

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 April 2015 in Case R 1355/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant requests the Office:

— to review the division opposition judgment and declare the opposition inadmissible;

— to order the opponent to bear the costs and applicant’s fees in the opposition proceedings on the basis of article 81 CTM Regulation.

Plea in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/50

Action brought on 17 September 2015 — LLR-G5 v OHIM — Glycan Finance (SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5)

(Case T-539/15)

(2015/C 381/61)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: LLR-G5 Ltd (Castlebar, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Glycan Finance Corp. Ltd (Sheffield, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark in colour containing the word elements ‘SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5’ — Community trade mark application No 10 424 703

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2015 in Case R 291/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision to the extent that it dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division of 27 November 2013 in case B 2 027 053, and to the extent that it granted the other party’s appeal against the same decision of the Opposition Division;

— the opposition of the other party to the registration of the applicant’s community trade mark application No. 1 042 4703 is dismissed;

— order OHIM and the other party, if it should intervene in these proceedings, to pay the costs.

Plea in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 398/69

Action brought on 25 September 2015 — Fondazione Casamica v Commission and EASME

(Case T-569/15)

(2015/C 398/83)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Fondazione Casamica (Salerno, Italy) (represented by: M. Lamberti, lawyer)

Defendants: Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized enterprises (EASME), European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

— annul the contested measure: Results of the evaluation — Ineligible proposal. Proposal: A4A, 699442 — Decision ref. Ares (2015)3187639, notified on 29 July 2015, adopted by the European Commission, EASME Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized enterprises, inasmuch as it is unlawful for the reasons stated;

— declare the proposal to participate, Proposal number A4A, 699442, acronym A4A, title: Archaeology 4 All, to be suitable and admit to the tender procedure the applicant and its partners, within the framework of the consortium formed for the purpose of taking part in that procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The call for proposals forming the subject-matter of this action is intended to establish, define and develop a model for accessible tourism which, after identifying the difficulties linked to disabilities, overcomes them by means of a standard model which represents an appropriate response and may be offered at every site of cultural and archaeological interest.

The eligibility requirements for submitting a project included, in addition to specialised and long-standing experience in the specific sector and in addition to a legal person closely associated with the objectives of the proposal, the presence of a national, regional or local governmental authority.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1. First plea in law, concerning the eligibility of the proposal. — The Supervisory Authority for Archaeology, Campania (Soprintendenza Archeologia della Campania) is a body recognised as a governmental authority in that it is a local managing department of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism (Ufficio Dirigenziale Periferico del Ministero dei Beni e delle Attività Culturali e del Turismo).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 398/70

Action brought on 5 October 2015 — For Tune v OHIM — Gastwerk Hotel Hamburg (fortune)

(Case T-579/15)

(2015/C 398/84)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: For Tune sp. z o.o. (Warszawa, Poland) (represented by: K. Popławska, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gastwerk Hotel Hamburg GmbH & Co. KG (Hamburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘fortune’ — Application for registration No 1 1 5 25 491

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 August 2015 in Case R 2808/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision;

— order OHIM and the other party to the proceedings before the Board to pay the costs.

Plea(s) in law
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 406/37

Action brought on 29 September 2015 — Bimbo v OHIM — ISMS (BIMBO BEL SIMPLY MARKET)

(Case T-571/15)

(2015/C 406/37)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Bimbo, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: International Supermarket Stores (ISMS) SA (Croix, France)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘BIMBO BEL SIMPLY MARKET’ — Application for registration No 10 335 321

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 July 2015 in Case R 1297/2014-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— modify the decision of the Board of Appeal dated on 17 July 2015 in accordance with Article 65(3) CTMR, rejecting the CTM Application No 10 335 321 in its entirety;

— subsidiarity and only in the case the above claim would be rejected, the annulment of the Board of Appeal decision, dated 17 July 2015;

— order the defendants to pay the procedural costs.

Pleas in law