ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/46

Judgment of the General Court of 16 February 2017 — Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult v EUIPO (Limbic® Map)

(Case T-513/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Limbic® Map - Lack of distinctive character - Absolute ground for refusal - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 104/64)

Language of the case: German

Parties

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

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 June 2015 (Case R 1973/2014-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Limbic® Map as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 June 2015 (Case R 1973/2014-1);

2. Orders that EUIPO shall bear its own costs as well as those incurred by Gruppe Nymphenburg Consult AG.

(1) OJ C 354, 26.10.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 86/25

Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2017 — Bodegas Vega Sicilia v EUIPO (TEMPOS VEGA SICILIA)

(Case T-696/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark TEMPOS VEGA SICILIA - Absolute ground for refusal - Trade mark for wine with geographical indications - Article 7(1)(j) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 086/33)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Bodegas Vega Sicilia, SA (Valbuena de Duero, Spain) (represented by: S. Alonso Maruri, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Muñiz Rodríguez and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 September 2015 (Case R 285/2015-4) concerning an application for registration of the word sign TEMPOS VEGA SICILIA as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bodegas Vega Sicilia, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 144/37

Judgment of the General Court of 16 March 2017 — Capella v EUIPO — Abus (APUS)

(Case T-473/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark APUS - Earlier national word mark ABUS - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Likelihood of confusion - Successive restrictions of the trade mark application before the Board of Appeal - Article 43(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Competence of the Board of Appeal - Article 64(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Right to be heard - Article 75, second sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 - Rule 13(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95))

(2017/C 144/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Capella EOOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: F. Henkel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Abus August Bremicker Söhne KG (Wetter, Germany) (represented by: G. Hallwachs, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2015 (Case R 117/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Abus August Bremicker Söhne and Capella.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 June 2015 (Case R 117/2014-4);

2. Orders EUIPO, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by Capella EOOD;

3. Declares that Abus August Bremicker Söhne KG is to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 328, 5.10.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 121/25

Judgment of the General Court of 1 March 2017 — Universiteit Antwerpen v REA

(Case T-208/15) (1)

((Arbitration clause - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Marie Curie actions - Early-stage researchers - Call for proposals FP7-People-ITN-2008 - Grant agreements - Eligible costs - Recovery of sums paid - Concept of hosting researchers - Proportionality))

(2017/C 121/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Universiteit Antwerpen (Antwerp, Belgium) (represented by: P. Teerlinck and P. de Bandt, lawyers)

Defendant: Research Executive Agency (REA) (represented by: S. Payan-Lagrou and V. Canetti, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

Action under Article 272 TFEU seeking, first of all, a declaration that Grant Agreements No 238214 ‘C7’ (Cerebellar-Cortical Control: Cells, Circuits, Computation, and Clinic) and No 238686 ‘Cerebnet’ (Timing and plasticity in the olivo-cerebellar system), which were entered into in the context of call for proposals FP7-People-ITN-2008, cannot be interpreted as imposing an obligation on the beneficiaries to provide training to early-stage researchers exclusively on their own premises and, as a consequence, confirmation that the REA cannot reject as ineligible part of the costs relating to the training of three early-stage researchers outside the applicant’s premises; and, secondly, an order that the REA is to pay all the costs related to the training of those early-stage researchers, as claimed by the applicant, together with interest from the date on which the payments were due under the agreements.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the Research Executive Agency (REA) to pay Universiteit Antwerpen the sum of EUR 45 526,73, corresponding to payment of some of the eligible costs under the ‘Cerebnet’ Agreement No 238686 entered into under the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013), together with contractual interest from the date from which that amount was due under that agreement;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the REA and Universiteit Antwerpen to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 195/21

Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2017 — BASF v EUIPO — Evonik Industries (DINCH)

(Case T-721/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark DINCH - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptiveness - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 195/29)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: BASF SE (Ludwigshafen, Germany) (represented by: A. Schulz and C. Onken, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Pethke and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Evonik Industries AG (Essen, Germany) (represented by A. Schabenberger, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 September 2015 (Case R 2080/2014-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Evonik Industries and BASF.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders BASF SE to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 22.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 151/29

Judgment of the General Court of 28 March 2017 — Deutsche Telekom v Commission

(Case T-210/15) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a procedure for the application of the competition rules - Refusal to grant access - Duty to state reasons - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party - Exception relating to the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits - Overriding public interest - Consultation with third parties - Transparency - No response to a confirmatory request with the time limits))

(2017/C 151/36)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Telekom AG (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: A. Rosenfeld and O. Corzilius, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J. Vondung and A. Buchet, and subsequently by F. Erlbacher, P. Van Nuffel and A. Dawes, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 17 February 2015 refusing to grant the applicant access to documents relating to the procedure for abuse of dominant position with reference COMP/AT.40089 — Deutsche Telekom.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Deutsche Telekom AG is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 270, 17.8.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/21

Judgment of the General Court of 21 June 2017 — Tillotts Pharma v EUIPO — Ferring (OCTASA)

(Case T-632/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark OCTASA - Prior German and Benelux word marks PENTASA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 256/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tillotts Pharma AG (Rheinfelden, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ferring BV (Hoofddorp, Netherlands) (represented by: D. Slopek, lawyer, and I. Fowler, Solicitor

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 September 2015 (Case R 2386/2014-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Ferring and Tillotts Pharma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tillotts Pharma AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/18

Judgment of the General Court of 16 May 2017 — AW v EUIPO — Pharma Mar (YLOELIS)

(Case T-85/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark YLOELIS - Earlier EU word mark YONDELIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 221/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Alfa Wassermann SpA (AW) (Alanno, Italy), authorised to replace Alfa Wassermann Hungary Kft. (represented by: M. Best, U. Pfleghar and S. Schäffner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Pharma Mar, SA (Colmenar Viejo, Spain) (represented by: N. González-Alberto Rodríguez, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 December 2014 (Case R 1100/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Pharma Mar and Alfa Wassermann Hungary.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Alfa Wassermann SpA (AW) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 283/34

Judgment of the General Court of 20 July 2017 — Badica and Kardiam v Council

(Case T-619/15) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in the Central African Republic - Freezing of funds - Initial decision to list - List of persons and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Inclusion of the applicants’ names - Implementation of a UN resolution - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of defence - Presumption of innocence - Manifest error of assessment))

(2017/C 283/51)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Bureau d’achat de diamant Centrafrique (Badica) (Bangui, Central African Republic) and Kardiam (Antwerp, Belgium) (represented by: D. Luff and L. Defalque, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and P. Mahnič Bruni, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1485 of 2 September 2015 implementing Article 17(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 224/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic (OJ 2015 L 229, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Bureau d’achat de diamant Centrafrique (Badica) and Kardiam to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 277/34

Judgment of the General Court of 28 June 2017 — Tayto Group v EUIPO — MIP Metro (real)

(Case T-287/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark real - Genuine use - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Use of the mark by a third party - Article 15(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Proof of genuine use - Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))

(2017/C 277/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tayto Group Ltd (Corby, United Kingdom) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2015 (Case R 2285/2013-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Tayto Group and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Tayto Group Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 382/39

Judgment of the General Court of (Fourth Chamber) of 27 September 2017 — BelTechExport v Council

(Case T-765/15) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Belarus - Freezing of funds - Suspension of measures - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of defence - Right to be heard - Error of assessment))

(2017/C 382/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BelTechExport ZAO (Minsk, Belarus) (represented by: J. Jerņeva and E. Koškins, lawyers)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Paasivirta and L. Havas, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/1957 of 29 October 2015 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2015 L 284, p. 149), and of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1948 of 29 October 2015 amending Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus (OJ 2015 L 284, p. 62), in so far as they concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BelTechExport ZAO to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

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

(1) OJ C 68, 22.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 369/7

Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2017 — Uganda Commercial Impex v Council

(Cases T-107/15 and T-347/15) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - List of the persons, entities and bodies acting in breach of the embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list))

(2017/C 369/08)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Uganda Commercial Impex Ltd (Kampala, Uganda) (represented, in Case T-107/15, by S. Zaiwalla, P. Reddy, Z. Burbeza, A. Meskarian, K. Mittal, Solicitors, and R. Blakeley, Barrister, and, in Case T-347/15, by S. Zaiwalla, P. Reddy, A. Meskarian, K. Mittal and R. Blakeley)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented, in Case T-107/15, initially by B. Driessen and E. Dumitriu-Segnana, and subsequently by B. Driessen and M. Veiga, Agents, and, in Case T-347/15, by B. Driessen, E. Dumitriu-Segnana and M. Veiga)

Re:

Application, in Case T-107/15, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, for annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2014/862/CFSP of 1 December 2014 implementing Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2014 L 346, p. 36) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1275/2014 of 1 December 2014 implementing Article 9(1) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2014 L 346, p. 3), and, in so far as necessary, for a declaration that Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 of 18 July 2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2005 L 193, p. 1) is not applicable to the applicant and, in Case T-347/15, an application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/620 of 20 April 2015 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2015 L 102, p. 43) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/614 of 20 April 2015, implementing Article 9(4) of Regulation No 1183/2005 (OJ 2015 L 102, p. 10), and, in so far as necessary, for a declaration that Article 9(1) of Regulation No 1183/2005 is not applicable to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-107/15 and T-347/15 for the purposes of the judgment;

2. Dismisses the actions;

3. Orders Uganda Commercial Impex Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 171, 26.5.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 13/13

Judgment of the General Court of 20 November 2017 — Voigt v Parliament

(Case T-618/15) (1)

((Member of the European Parliament - Refusal to make Parliament premises available - Third-country nationals - Refusal of access to Parliament buildings - Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin - Discrimination on grounds of nationality - Admissibility of a plea - Discrimination on grounds of political opinions))

(2018/C 013/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Udo Voigt (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. Richter, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: N. Görlitz, S. Seyr and M. Windisch, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of, firstly, the Parliament’s decision of 9 June 2015 refusing to make a room available to the applicant for the purpose of holding a press conference on 16 June 2015 and, secondly, of the Parliament’s decision of 16 June 2015 refusing Russian nationals access to its premises.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Udo Voigt to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Parliament, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Court of Justice.

(1) OJ C 106, 21.3.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 424/29

Judgment of the General Court of 26 October 2017 — Sulayr Global Service v EUIPO — Sulayr Calidad (sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE)

(Case T-685/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE - Earlier national word mark SULAYR - Relative ground for refusal - No similarity of the services - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2017/C 424/41)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Sulayr Global Service, SL (Valle del Zalabi, Spain) (represented by: P. López Ronda, G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by S. Palmero Cabezas, and subsequently by J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Sulayr Calidad, SL (Grenada, Spain) (represented initially by E. Bayo de Gispert and G. Hinarejos Mulliez, and subsequently by G. Hinarejos Mulliez and I. Valdelomar Serrano, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 September 2015 (Case R 149/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Sulayr Calidad and Sulayr Global Service.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 September 2015 (Case R 149/2015-1) to the extent that it upheld the opposition to registration of the mark applied for in respect of services in Class 40;

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Sulayr Global Service, SL, for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court;

3. Orders Sulayr Calidad, SL, to bear its own costs for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court and to pay the expenses necessarily incurred by Sulayr Global Service for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

(1) OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/31

Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2018 — MSD Animal Health Innovation and Intervet international v EMA

(Case T-729/15) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents held by the EMA and submitted in the context of the application for marketing authorisation for the veterinary medicinal product Bravecto - Decision to grant a third party access to the documents - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - No general presumption of confidentiality))

(2018/C 104/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: MSD Animal Health Innovation GmbH (Schwabenheim, Germany) and Intervet international BV (Boxmeer, Netherlands) (represented initially by: P. Bogaert, lawyer, B. Kelly and H. Billson, Solicitors, J. Stratford QC, and C. Thomas, Barrister, and, subsequently, by P. Bogaert, B. Kelly, J. Stratford, and C. Thomas)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA) (represented by: T. Jabłoński, A. Spina, S. Marino, A. Rusanov and N. Rampal Olmedo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Decision EMA/785809/2015 of the EMA of 25 November 2015, granting to a third party, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43), access to documents containing information submitted in the context of an application for marketing authorisation for the veterinary medicinal product Bravecto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders MSD Animal Health Innovation GmbH and Intervet international BV to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), including those relating to the application for interim measures.

(1) OJ C 59, 15.2.2006.