ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 March 2021 — Golvabia Innovation v EUIPO (MaxWear)

(Case T-99/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark MaxWear - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 163/39)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Golvabia Innovation AB (Anderstorp, Sweden) (represented by: D. Thorbjörnsson, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2019 (Case R 888/2019-1) concerning an application for registration of the word sign MaxWear as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders Golvabia Innovation AB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 21 April 2021 — Robert Klingel v EUIPO (MEN+)

(Case T-345/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for registration of the EU figurative mark MEN+ - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Examination of the facts - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 242/56)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Robert Klingel OHG (Pforzheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Zick, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2020 (Case R 1906/2019-1) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign MEN+ as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Robert Klingel OHG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 April 2021 — Klaus Berthold v EUIPO — Thomann (HB Harley Benton)

(Case T-284/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark HB Harley Benton - Earlier EU word mark HB - Earlier national trade name - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and (4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 242/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Klaus Berthold Besitzgesellschaft GmbH & Co. KG (Thalhausen, Germany) (represented by: E. Strauß, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Thomann GmbH (Burgebrach, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 March 2020 (Case R 1359/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Thomann GmbH and Klaus Berthold Besitzgesellschaft GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Klaus Berthold Besitzgesellschaft GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 222, 6.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 –Riviera-Airport v EUIPO — Aéroports de la Côte d’Azur (RIVIERA AIRPORTS)

(Case T-396/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark RIVIERA AIRPORTS - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 297/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aeroporto di Villanova d’Albenga SpA (Riviera-Airport) (Villanova d’Albenga, Italy) (represented by: G. Casucci, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Aéroports de la Côte d’Azur (Nice, France) (represented by: Y. Bizollon, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2020 (Case R 2172/2019 4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Riviera-Airport and Aéroports de la Côte d’Azur.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Aeroporto di Villanova d’Albenga SpA (Riviera-Airport) to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 271, 17.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2021 — Yongkang Kugooo Technology v EUIPO — Ford Motor Company (kugoo)

(Case T-324/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark kugoo - Earlier EU and national word marks KUGA and earlier EU word mark KUGA ENERGI - 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))

(2021/C 263/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Yongkang Kugooo Technology Co. Ltd (Yongkang, China) (represented by: P. Pérot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Ford Motor Company (Dearborn, Michigan, United States)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 March 2020 (Case R 65/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ford Motor Company and Yongkang Kugooo Technology.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Yongkang Kugooo Technology Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Biovene Cosmetics v EUIPO — Eugène Perma France (BIOVÈNE)

(Case T-232/20) (1)

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

(2021/C 329/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Biovene Cosmetics, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: E. Estella Garbayo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Eugène Perma France (Saint-Denis, France) (represented by: S. Havard Duclos, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 February 2020 (Case R 739/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Eugène Perma France and Biovene Cosmetics.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Biovene Cosmetics, SL to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — Skyliners v EUIPO — Sky (SKYLINERS)

(Case T-15/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SKYLINERS - Earlier EU word marks SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 41(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 46(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Entitlement to file the opposition)

(2021/C 329/26)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Skyliners GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: A. Renck and C. Stöber, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Sky Ltd (Isleworth, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Zalewska, lawyer, and A. Brackenbury, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 October 2019 (Case R 798/2018-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Sky and Skyliners.

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 29 October 2019 (Case R 798/2018-4);

2. Orders EUIPO and Sky Ltd to bear their own costs and, in addition, to pay jointly those incurred by Skyliners GmbH.

(1) OJ C 61, 24.2.2020.
1.

Annuls the decision of the Secretary General of the Parliament of 17 December 2019 on the recovery from Mr Robert Rochefort of a sum of EUR 61 423,40 unduly paid by way of parliamentary assistance and the corresponding debit note of 22 January 2020 in so far as they concern sums paid between April and June 2010, February, June and July 2011 and, lastly, between 21 May and 27 July 2012;
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — Veronese v EUIPO — Veronese Design Company (VERONESE)

(Case T-749/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark VERONESE - Earlier EU word mark VERONESE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation 207/2009 (now Article (8)(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Decision adopted following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision - Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 - res judicata)

(2021/C 349/54)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Veronese (Paris, France) (represented by: S. Herrburger, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Veronese Design Company Ltd (Kowloon, Hong Kong) (represented by: B. Lafont, lawyer)

Re:

Appeal brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 October 2020 (Case R-1951/2020-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Veronese and Veronese Design Company.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Veronese to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — Sfera Joven v EUIPO — Koc (SFORA WEAR)

(Case T-493/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SFORA WEAR - Earlier EU figurative marks Sfera KIDS and Sfera - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 431/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sfera Joven, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Andrzej Koc (Kobyłka, Poland) (represented by: J. Aftyka, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2020 (Case R 2030/2019-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Sfera Joven and Andrzej Koc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sfera Joven, SA, to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 1 September 2021 — FF IP v EUIPO — Seven (the DoubleF)

(Case T-23/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark the DoubleF - Earlier EU word mark THE DOUBLE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Relevant public - Similarity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 422/17)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: FF IP Srl (Mantua, Italy) (represented by: M. Locatelli, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Seven SpA (Leinì, Italy) (represented by: D. Sindico and E. Tonello, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 October 2019 (Case R 2588/2018-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Seven and FF IP.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Dismisses Seven SpA’s application for refusal of registration of the European Union figurative mark the DoubleF for goods in Class 18 and services in Class 35;

3. Orders FF IP Srl to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — Kande Mumpompa v Council

(Case T-97/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons subject to restrictive measures - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard - Proof that inclusion and retention on the lists is well founded - Manifest error of assessment - Continuation of the factual and legal circumstances which led to the adoption of the restrictive measures - Right to private and family life - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality - Plea of illegality)

(2021/C 452/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Alex Kande Mumpompa (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/2109 of 9 December 2019 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2019 L 318, p. 134), and, second, Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/2101 of 9 December 2019 implementing Article 9 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 2019 L 318, p. 1) in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Alex Kande Mupompa to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2021 — Beelow v EUIPO (made of wood)

(Case T-702/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark made of wood - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2021/C 452/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Timo Beelow (Wuppertal, Germany) (represented by: J. Vogtmeier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Bosse and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 September 2020 (Case R 108/2020-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign made of wood as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Timo Beelow to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 28, 25.1.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — LP v Parliament

(Case T-519/20) (1)

(Civil service - Accredited parliamentary assistants - Refusal to offer employment - Conditions of employment - Character references - Manifest error of assessment - Due diligence)

(2021/C 471/64)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: LP (represented by: J. Bosquet and G. Op de Beeck, lawyers)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: C. González Argüelles and J. Van Pottelberge, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 22 October 2019 rejecting the applicant’s application for employment.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders LP to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 348, 19.10.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2021 — Collibra v EUIPO — Dietrich (COLLIBRA and collibra)

(Case T-128/20 and T-129/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Applications for the EU word mark COLLIBRA and figurative mark collibra - Earlier national word mark Kolibri - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2021/C 462/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Collibra (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Renck, I. Junkar and A. Bothe, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Hans Dietrich (Starnberg, Germany) (represented by: T. Träger, lawyer)

Re:

TWO ACTIONS brought against two decisions of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 December 2019 (Cases R 737/2019-1 and R 738/2019-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Dietrich and Collibra.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-128/20 and T-129/20 for the purposes of the judgment;

2. Dismisses the actions;

3. Orders Collibra to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 13 October 2021 — Freundlieb v EUIPO (BANDIT)

(Case T-733/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - EU word mark BANDIT - Failure to apply for renewal of the trade mark registration - Revocation of the trade mark on expiry of the registration - Application for restitutio in integrum - Article 104 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Duty of care - No review - Failure to comply with time limits)

(2021/C 490/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Andreas Freundlieb (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: J. Vogtmeier, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 October 2020 (Case R 730/2020-5), relating to an application for restitutio in integrum in relation to the right to apply for renewal of the EU word mark BANDIT.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Andreas Freundlieb to bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2021 — Esteves Lopes Granja v EUIPO — IVDP (PORTWO GIN)

(Case T-417/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark PORTWO GIN - Earlier designation of origin ‘Porto’ - Concepts of ‘use’ and ‘exploitation’ of a protected designation of origin - Article 103(2)(a)(ii) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013)

(2021/C 481/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Joaquim José Esteves Lopes Granja (Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal) (represented by: O. Santos Costa, 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: Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto, IP (IVDP) (Peso da Régua, Portugal) (represented by: P. Sousa e Silva, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 April 2020 (Case R 993/2019-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto, IP and Joaquim Jósé Esteves Lopes Granja.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Joaquim José Esteves Lopes Granja to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Stada Arzneimittel v EUIPO — Pfizer (RUXYMLA)

(Case T-248/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark RUXYMLA - Earlier EU word mark RUXIMERA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 2/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Stada Arzneimittel AG (Bad Vilbel, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, 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: Pfizer Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 February 2020 (Case R 1878/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Pfizer and Stada Arzneimittel.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Stada Arzneimittel AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2021 — Square v EUIPO — ($ Cash App)

(Case T-211/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark $ Cash App - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2021/C 502/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Square, Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States) (represented by: M. Hawkins, Solicitor, and by K. Lüder and T. Dolde, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 February 2020 (Case R 810/2019-1), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark $ Cash App.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Square, Inc. to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.