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

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler (apiheal)

(Case T-51/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark apiheal - Earlier national word mark APIRETAL - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the goods - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2020/C 423/49)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa Rodríguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: 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: SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret AŞ (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: M. López Camba, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2018 (Case R 1725/2017-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Ern and SBS Bilimsel Bio Çözümler Sanayi Ve Ticaret.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Laboratorios Ern, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Veronese Design Company v EUIPO — Veronese (VERONESE)

(Case T-608/19) (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 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 399/49)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Veronese Design Company Ltd (Kowloon, Hong Kong) (represented by: B. Lafont, 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 SAS (Paris, France) (represented by: S. Herrburger, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 June 2019 (Case R 2434/2018-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Veronese and Veronese Design Company.

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 18 June 2019 (Case R 2434/2018-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Veronese SAS and Veronese Design Company Ltd;

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Veronese Design Company;

3. Orders Veronese to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 372, 4.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 October 2020 — Target Ventures Group v EUIPO — Target Partners (TARGET VENTURES)

(Case T-273/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark TARGET VENTURES - Absolute ground for invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 9/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Target Ventures Group Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands) (represented by: T. Dolde and P. Homann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Target Partners GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Klett and C. Mikyska, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 February 2019 (Case R 1684/2017-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Target Ventures Group and Target Partners.

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 4 February 2019 (Case R 1684/2017-2);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Target Ventures Group Ltd, including those which the latter party incurred before the Board of Appeal;

3. Orders Target Partners GmbH to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 220, 1.7.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2020 — Body Attack Sports Nutrition v EUIPO — Sakkari (Sakkattack)

(Case T-788/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Sakkattack - Earlier international word marks ATTACK and Body Attack and earlier international figurative mark Body Attack SPORTS NUTRITION - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 433/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Body Attack Sports Nutrition GmbH & Co. KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: S. Labesius, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Maria Sakkari (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: M. Nikolaraki, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 August 2019 (Joined Cases R 2432/2018-4 and R 2562/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Body Attack Sports Nutrition and Ms Sakkari.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Body Attack Sports Nutrition GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 10, 13.1.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 December 2020 — easyCosmetic Swiss v EUIPO — UWI (easycosmetic)

(Case T-858/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark easyCosmetic - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 35/62)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: easyCosmetic Swiss GmbH (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: D. Terheggen and S. Sullivan, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: UWI Unternehmensberatungs- und Wirtschaftsinformations GmbH (Bad Nauheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Krisch, T. Guttau and V. Wellens, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 October 2019 (Case R 973/2019-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between UWI and easyCosmetic Swiss.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders EasyCosmetic Swiss GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

3. Orders UWI Unternehmensberatungs- und Wirtschaftsinformations GmbH to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 2 December 2020 — inMusic Brands v EUIPO — Equipson (Marq)

(Case T-687/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark Marq - Earlier national and international figurative marks MARK - 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) - Declaration of partial invalidity)

(2021/C 28/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: inMusic Brands, Inc. (Cumberland, Rhode Island, United States) (represented by: D. Rose, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Equipson, SA (Silla, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 July 2019 (Case R 1759/2018-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Equipson and inMusic Brands.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders inMusic Brands, Inc., to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — Enoport v EUIPO — Miguel Torres (CABEÇA DE TOIRO)

(Case T-811/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark CABEÇA DE TOIRO - Earlier EU word mark SANGRE DE TORO - 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 72/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Enoport — Produção de Bebidas Lda (Rio Maior, Portugal) (represented by: J. Alves Coelho, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (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: Miguel Torres, SA (Vilafranca del Penedès, Spain) (represented by: M. Ceballos Rodríguez and M. Robledo McClymont, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 September 2019 (Case R 394/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Miguel Torres and Enoport — Produção de Bebidas.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Enoport — Produção de Bebidas Lda to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 36, 3.2.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Cinkciarz.pl v EUIPO (€$)

(Case T-665/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark €$ - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 53/47)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Cinkciarz.pl sp. z o.o. (Zielona Góra, Poland) (represented by: E. Skrzydło-Tefelska and K. Gajek, 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 4 July 2019 (Case R 1345/2018-1) regarding an application for registration of the figurative sign €$ as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Cinkciarz.pl sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 3 February 2021 — Ruhorimbere v Council

(Case T-121/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Retention of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons covered - 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 98/26)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Éric Ruhorimbere (Mbuji-Mayi, 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, H. Marcos Fraile, S. Van Overmeire and M.-C. Cadilhac, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 134, p. 47) and, second, Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018 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 2018 L 314, 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 Éric Ruhorimbere to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 27 January 2021 — Turk Hava Yollari v EUIPO — Sky (skylife)

(Case T-382/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark skylife - Earlier EU word mark SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 88/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Turk Hava Yollari AO (Istanbul, Turkey) (represented by: R. Almaraz Palmero, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas 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. Brackenbury, Solicitor, and A. Zalewska, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 April 2019 (Case R 880/2018-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Sky and Turk Hava Yollari.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Turk Hava Yollari AO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Sky Ltd.

(1) OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2021 — Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO — Filotas Bellas & Yios (Halloumi)

(Case T-282/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Halloumi χαλλούμι Vermion grill cheese/grill est/grill kase M BELAS PREMIUM GREEK DAIRY SINCE 1927 - Earlier EU collective word mark HALLOUMI - Relative ground for refusal - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 53(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now article 60(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation 2017/1001))

(2021/C 217/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC, S. Baran, Barrister, and V. Marsland, Solicitor)

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: Filotas Bellas & Yios AE (Alexandreia Imathias, Greece)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Chamber of the Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 February 2019 (Case R 2295/2017-4), relating to opposition proceedings between the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi and Filotas Bellas & Yios.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 213, 24.6.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 10 March 2021 — Kerry Luxembourg v EUIPO — Ornua (KERRYMAID)

(Case T-693/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark KERRYMAID - Earlier EU figurative mark Kerrygold - Relative ground for refusal - Geographical name - Dominant element - Peaceful coexistence - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Application of the law ratione temporis)

(2021/C 163/30)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Traub, lawyer, and I. Connor, Solicitor)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ornua Co-operative Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and A. Sanz Cerralbo, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 July 2019 (Case R 2473/2013-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Kerry Luxembourg and Ornua.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kerry Luxembourg Sàrl to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Ornua Co-operative Ltd.

(1) OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 28 April 2021 — Linde Material Handling v EUIPO — Verti Aseguradora (VertiLight)

(Case T-644/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark VertiLight - Earlier national word mark VERTI - Relative ground for refusal - No damage to reputation - No link between the marks at issue - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2021/C 242/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Linde Material Handling GmbH (Aschaffenburg, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Verti Aseguradora, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: A. Sanz Cerralbo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 July 2019 (Case R 1849/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Verti Aseguradora, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, and Linde Material Handling.

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 5 July 2019 (Case R 1849/2018-5);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Linde Material Handling GmbH;

3. Orders Verti Aseguradora, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, SA, to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 — Lianopoulou v Commission

(Case T-880/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Decision on invalidity - Opinion of the invalidity committee - Article 78 of the Staff Regulations - Duty to state reasons)

(2021/C 297/47)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Anastasia Lianopoulou (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Quraishi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Bohr and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 27 February 2019 terminating the service of the applicant on 28 February 2019 on account of the finding of her invalidity and granting her an invalidity allowance as from 1 March 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 27 February 2019 terminating the service of Ms Anastasia Lianopoulou on 28 February 2019 on account of the finding of her invalidity and granting her an invalidity allowance as from 1 March 2019;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the Commission to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 — Exxonmobil Petroleum & Chemical v ECHA

(Case T-177/19) (1)

(REACH - Establishment of a list of substances identified with a view to their eventual inclusion in Annex XIV of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Inclusion of phenanthrene on that list - Articles 57 and 59 of Regulation No 1907/2006 - Manifest error of assessment - Weight of evidence determination - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons - Right to be heard)

(2021/C 297/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Exxonmobil Petroleum & Chemical BVBA (Antwerp, Belgium) (represented by: A. Kołtunowska and A. Bartl, lawyers)

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by: W. Broere, C. Buchanan and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents, and by S. Raes, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the applicant: European Petroleum Refiners Association (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-P. Montfort and T. Delille, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: A.-L. Desjonquères, E. Leclerc, T. Stehelin and W. Zemamta, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of ECHA Decision ED/88/2018 of 19 December 2018, in so far as it places phenanthrene on the list of substances identified as being of very high concern provided for in Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1, corrigendum OJ 2007 L 136, p. 3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Exxonmobil Petroleum & Chemical BVBA to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA);

3. Orders the French Republic and the European Petroleum Refiners Association to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 187, 3.6.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2021 — DD v FRA

(Case T-632/19) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Claims for damages - Non-material damage - Implementation of the judgments of the Civil Service Tribunal and of the General Court)

(2021/C 349/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: DD (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (represented by: M. O’Flaherty, acting as Agent, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, compensation for the non-material harm allegedly suffered by the applicant, secondly, annulment of the decision of the Director of the FRA dated 19 November 2018 rejecting his request for compensation and, thirdly, if need be, annulment of the decision of 12 June 2019 rejecting the complaint against the abovementioned decision of 19 November 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders DD to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA).

(1) OJ C 406, 2.12.2019.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — GY v ECB

(Case T-746/19) (1)

(Civil service - ECB staff - Remuneration - Household allowance - Amendment of the scheme applicable - Rejection of the 2019 application - Plea of illegality - Equal treatment - No transitional measures)

(2021/C 320/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: GY (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: F. von Lindeiner and D. Nessaf, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union for annulment of the ECB’s decision of 28 January 2019 not to grant the applicant the household allowance for 2019.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 28 January 2019 in so far as it refuses to grant the household allowance for 2019 to GY;

2. Orders the ECB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 36, 3.2.2020.