ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2019 — Inditex v EUIPO — Ffauf Italia (ZARA)

(Case T-269/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ZARA - Earlier national word and figurative marks LE DELIZIE ZARA and ZARA - Proof of genuine use of the earlier marks - Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 18(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 230/50)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) (Arteixo, Spain) (represented by: G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal and E. Armero Lavie, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ffauf Italia SpA (Riese Pio X, Italy) (represented by: P. Creta, A. Lanzarini, B. Costa, A. Sponzilli and M. Lazzarotto, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 February 2018 (Joined Cases R 359/2015-5 and R 409/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ffauf Italia and Inditex.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 February 2018 (Joined Cases R 359/2015-5 and R 409/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ffauf Italia SA and Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex), as regards ‘preserved, frozen, dried and cooked fruits and vegetables; jellies, jams, compotes; eggs, milk and milk products; edible oils and fats’ in Class 29 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, ‘rice, tapioca, sago, flour and preparations made from cereals, bread, pastry; yeast, baking-powder; salt, mustard; vinegar, sauces (condiments); spices; rice-based snack food’ in Class 30, ‘fresh vegetables’ in Class 31, ‘fresh juices’ in Class 32, ‘retailing and wholesaling in shops, selling via global computer networks, by catalogue, by mail order, by telephone, by radio and television, and via other electronic means of preserved, frozen, dried and cooked vegetables; edible oils, rice, flour and preparations made from cereals, bread, vinegar, sauces (condiments)’ in Class 35 and ‘restaurant services (food), self-service restaurants, cafeterias’ in Class 43;

2. Orders EUIPO and Ffauf Italia to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by Industria de Diseño Textil (Inditex) in the proceedings before the General Court.

(1) OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2019 — Team Beverage v EUIPO (LIEBLINGSWEIN)

(Case T-55/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark LIEBLINGSWEIN - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Misleading character - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 220/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Team Beverage AG (Wildeshausen, Germany) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch and M. Alber, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 November 2017 (Case R 291/2017-1), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign LIEBLINGSWEIN as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Team Beverage AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 June 2019 — Rietze v EUIPO — Volkswagen (Motor vehicle VW Caddy)

(Case T-192/18) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Registered Community design representing the motor vehicle VW Caddy - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - Individual character - Informed user - Different overall impression - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Burden of proof on the applicant for a declaration of invalidity - Requirements relating to the reproduction of an earlier design)

(2019/C 255/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Rietze GmbH & Co. KG (Altdorf, Germany) (represented by: M. Krogmann, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: C. Klawitter, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2018 (Case R 1244/2016-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Rietze and Volkswagen.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Rietze GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Dentsply De Trey v EUIPO — IDS (AQUAPRINT)

(Case T-312/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark AQUAPRINT - Earlier national word marks AQUACEM and national unregistered marks AQUACEM and AQUASIL - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance - Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Action for passing off - No misrepresentation)

(2019/C 238/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Dentsply De Trey GmbH (Konstanz, Germany) (represented by: S. Clark, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaite-Orlovskiene, J. Ivanauskas and H. O’Neill, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: IDS SpA (Savone, Italy) (represented by: M. Andreolini and F. Andreolini, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 February 2018 (Case R 1438/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Dentsply De Trey and IDS

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Dentsply De Trey GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 240, 9.7.2018
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — Brita v EUIPO (Shape of a faucet)

(Case T-213/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of a faucet - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 288/60)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Brita GmbH (Taunusstein, Germany) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2018 (Case R 1864/2017-4), relating to an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a faucet as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Brita GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 166, 14.5.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 June 2019 — De Esteban Alonso v Commission

(Case T-138/18) (1)

(Civil Service - Former officials - OLAF investigation - ‘Eurostat’ case - Forwarding to the national judicial authorities of information relating to matters liable to result in criminal proceedings - Failure to notify potentially concerned officials beforehand - Harm allegedly suffered on account of the conduct of OLAF and the Commission during the proceedings - Material, non-material and physical harm - Causal link)

(2019/C 263/49)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Fernando De Esteban Alonso (Saint-Martin-de-Seignanx, France) (represented by: C. Huglo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Striani and J. Baquero Cruz, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for compensation for the material, non-material and physical harm which the applicant claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the European Commission to pay Mr Fernando De Esteban Alonso EUR 62 000 by way of compensation for the non-material harm suffered;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr De Esteban Alonso.

(1) OJ C 190, 4.6.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2019 — Klymenko v Council

(Case T-274/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2019/C 328/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Olexsandr Viktorovych Klymenko (Moscow, Russia) (represented by M. Phelippeau, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by A. Vitro and P. Mahnič, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018, amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L63, p. 48) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 5), in so far as the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018, amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as Mr Oleksandr Viktorovych Klymenko’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 249, 16.7.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2019 — Fashion Energy v EUIPO — Retail Royalty (1st AMERICAN)

(Case T-54/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark 1st AMERICAN - Earlier EU figurative mark representing an eagle - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Audi alteram partem rule - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Cross claim)

(2019/C 305/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fashion Energy Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: T. Müller and F. Togo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Retail Royalty Co. (Las Vegas, Nevada, USA) (represented by: M. Dick, Solicitor, and J. Bogatz, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 November 2017 (Case R 693/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Retail Royalty and Fashion Energy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 15 November 2017 (Case R 693/2017-2);

2. Dismisses the cross-claim as inadmissible;

3. In the main appeal, EUIPO and Retail Royalty Co. are ordered to bear their own costs and to each bear half of the costs incurred by Fashion Energy Srl.

4. In the cross-claim, Retail Royalty is ordered to bear its own costs and those incurred by Fashion Energy and EUIPO.

(1) OJ C 123, 9.4.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2019 — WI v Commission

(Case T-379/18) (1)

(Civil service - Pensions - Survivor’s pension - Registered non-marital partnership - Refusal to grant - Article 1(2)(c)(iv) of Annex VII of the Staff Regulation - Access to civil marriage - Principle of sound administration - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Exceptional Circumstances)

(2019/C 399/59)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: WI (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFUE for the annulment of the decision of the Commission of 16 August 2017 not to grant a survivor’s pension to the applicant, of the decision of 13 September 2017 in so far as it refused to grant a survivor’s pension to the applicant and of the decision of 9 March 2018 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders WI to pay the costs of the proceedings.

(1) OJ C 341, 24.9.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 5 September 2019 — C&A v EUIPO (#BESTDEAL)

(Case T-753/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark #BESTDEAL - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 357/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: C&A AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 October 2018 (Case R 1234/2018-2) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign #BESTDEAL as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders C&A AG to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — Piaggio & C. v EUIPO — Zhejiang Zhongneng Industry Group (Mopeds)

(Case T-219/18) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a moped - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - Individual character - Different overall impression - Informed user - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Interpretation consistent with Article 6 of Regulation No 6/2002 - No use of an earlier three-dimensional national trademark not registered in the registered design - Article 25(1)(e) of Regulation No 6/2002 - No unauthorised use of a work protected by the copyright law of a Member State in the registered design - Article 25(1)(f) of Regulation No 6/2002)

(2019/C 413/56)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Piaggio & C. SpA (Pontedera, Italy) (represented by: F. Jacobacci, B. La Tella and B. Lucchetti, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Zhejiang Zhongneng Industry Group Co. Ltd (Taizhou City, China) (represented by: M. Spolidoro, M. Gurrado, S. Verea and M. Balestriero, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 January 2018 (Case R 1496/2015-3), in relation to cancellation proceedings between Piaggio & C. and Zhejiang Zhongneng Industry Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Piaggio & C. SpA to pay the costs

(1) OJ C 182, 28.5.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2019 — Showroom v EUIPO — E-Gab (SHOWROOM)

(Case T-679/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark SHOWROOM - Earlier EU figurative mark SHOWROOM86 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 399/69)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Showroom sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Janicka-Kapłon, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Śliwińska and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: E-Gab NV (Ternat, Belgium)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2018 (Case R 1834/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between E-Gab and Showroom.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Showroom sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — Yanukovych v Council

(Case T-301/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2019/C 423/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Oleksandr Viktorovych Yanukovych (Saint Petersburg, Russia) (represented by: T. Beazley QC, E. Dean and J. Marjason-Stamp, Barristers)

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

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 48) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2018 L 63, p. 5), in so far as the applicant’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/333 of 5 March 2018 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/326 of 5 March 2018 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as Mr Oleksandr Viktorovych Yanukovych’s name was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

2. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2019 — DQ and Others v Parliament

(Case T-730/18) (1)

(Civil Service - Officials - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Psychological harassment - Scope of the duty to provide assistance - Removal measure - Duration of the administrative procedure - Liability - Non-material damage)

(2019/C 423/61)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: DQ and 11 other applicants, whose names are listed in the annex to the judgment (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and T. Lazian, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants essentially as a result of inappropriate handling of their request for assistance concerning psychological harassment ascribed to their line manager.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Orders the European Parliament to pay to DQ and the other applicants, whose names are listed in the annex, an overall amount of EUR 36 000, to be divided amongst them, in respect of the non-material damage suffered, together with interest, from the date of 13 December 2017, at the rate set by the European Central Bank for its principal refinancing operations, increased by three and a half percentage points, until the date of payment by the Parliament of the amount of EUR 36 000;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay half the costs incurred by DQ and the other applicants, whose names are listed in the annex;

4. Orders DQ and the other applicants, whose names are listed in the annex, to bear half of their own costs.

(1) OJ C 54, 11.2.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 17 October 2019 — E.I. Papadopoulos v EUIPO — Europastry (fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre)

(Case T-628/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre - Earlier EU figurative mark Caprice - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 432/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos SA (Moschato-Tavros, Greece) (represented by: C. Chrysanthis, P.V. Chardalia and A. Vasilogamvrou, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Lapinskaite, S. Palmero Cabezas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Europastry, SA (Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain) (represented by: L. Estropá Navarro, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 August 2018 (Case R 493/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos and Europastry.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 455, 17.12.2018.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 3 October 2019 — LegalCareers v EUIPO (LEGALCAREERS)

(Case T-686/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark LEGALCAREERS - Absolute grounds for refusal - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 7(1)(b)of Regulation 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 423/59)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: LegalCareers GmbH (Cologne, Germany) (represented by: M. Nielen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Schneider and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 September 2018 (Case R 234/2018-4), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign LEGALCAREERS as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LegalCareers GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 25, 21.1.2019.