ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

State aid – Concept – Intervention having effect of relieving burdens on an undertaking – Relevance to the interpretation of ‘subsidy’ within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Directive 93/37 (Art. 107(1) TFEU; Council Directive 93/37, Art. 2(1)) (see paras 25-33)

2. Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public works contracts – Directive 93/37 – Purpose – Effectiveness (Council Directive 93/37) (see paras 59-65)

3. Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Commission decision reducing the amount of Community financial assistance (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Directive 93/37, Art. 2(2)) (see paras 68-71)

Subject of the case

Re:

ACTION for annulment of European Commission Decision No C(2010) 5229 of 28 July 2010 concerning the cancellation of part of the contribution of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) under the single programming document for objective 1 for Community structural assistance in Martinique, France.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.
Keywords



Keywords

Community trade mark

—

Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark

—

Absolute grounds for refusal

—

Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 15-18

)
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 31 January 2012 — Cervecería Modelo v OHIM — Plataforma Continental (LA VICTORIA DE MEXICO)

(Case T-205/10)

‛Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Application for Community word mark LA VICTORIA DE MEXICO — Earlier Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘victoria’ and earlier national word mark VICTORIA — Registration refused in part — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009’

Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31, 32, 81, 82)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 March 2010 (Case R 322/2009-2) in relation to opposition proceedings between Plataforma Continental, SL and Cervecería Modelo, SA de CV.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Cervecería Modelo, SA de CV to pay the costs.

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 31 January 2012 — Cervecería Modelo v OHIM — Plataforma Continental (LA VICTORIA DE MEXICO)

(Case T-205/10)

‛Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Application for Community word mark LA VICTORIA DE MEXICO — Earlier Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘victoria’ and earlier national word mark VICTORIA — Registration refused in part — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009’

Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31, 32, 81, 82)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 March 2010 (Case R 322/2009-2) in relation to opposition proceedings between Plataforma Continental, SL and Cervecería Modelo, SA de CV.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Keywords



Keywords

Community trade mark

—

Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark

—

Relative grounds for refusal

—

Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation

—

Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services

—

Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(5)) (see paras 34-35, 45, 60, 74

)
Keywords



Keywords

Actions for annulment — Natural or legal persons — Locus standi — Tender procedure — Decision of the awarding authority addressed to a tendering consortium without legal personality — Action by an undertaking member of the consortium — Admissibility (Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU) (see para. 19)

2. Actions for annulment — Action against a decision confirming an earlier decision not challenged within the time-limits — Inadmissibility — Definition of confirmatory decision — Reexamination of an earlier decision in reply to a claim of new and substantial facts — Not included (see paras 22-24)

3. European Union — Institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Mandatory exceptions — Taking into account a specific interest of the applicant — Not included (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Arts 2(1), and 4(2) and (3)) (see paras 52-55)

4. European Union — Institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Objectives — Principle of the widest possible access — Strict interpretation of the exceptions to the principle of access — Observance of the principle of proportionality (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001) (see para. 65)

5. European Union — Institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Strict interpretation and application — Protection of the decision-making process — Scope — Documents drawn up by an evaluation committee in the context of a tendering procedure — Included — No obligation to disclose under the principle of transparency (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(3)) (see paras 78‑81, 88)

6. European Union — Institutions — Right of public access to documents — Regulation No 1049/2001 — Exceptions to the right of access to documents — Overriding public interest justifying the disclosure of documents — Distinction from the principle of transparency (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001, Art. 4(2) and (3)) (see para. 86)
Keywords



Keywords

Community trade mark

—

Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark

—

Relative grounds for refusal

—

Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services

—

Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31, 39, 40

)
Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 June 2012 — Constellation Brands v OHIM (COOK’S)

(Case T-314/10)

‛Community trade mark — Word mark COOK’S — Failure to apply for renewal of the mark — Cancellation of the mark upon expiry of the registration — Application for restitutio in integrum — Article 81 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009’

1. Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Restitutio in integrum — Conditions — Vigilance required by circumstances — Delegation of tasks concerning the renewal of a trade mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 81(1)) (see paras 17-18)

2. Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Restitutio in integrum — Conditions — Vigilance required by circumstances — Exceptional, and thus unpredictable, events — Human error in recording information — Not included (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 81(1)) (see paras 19, 28, 29)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 April 2010 (Case R 1048/2009-1) in so far as it dismissed the application for restitutio in integrum.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part

Keywords Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 41, 47-54 ) Subject of the case Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 October 2010 (Case R 815/2009‑4) relating to opposition proceedings between Ferrero SpA and Mr Harald Wohlfahrt. Operative part Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Mr Harald Wohlfahrt to pay the costs.

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 May 2012 — Wohlfahrt v OHIM — Ferrero (Kindertraum)

(Case T-580/10)

‛Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark Kindertraum — Earlier national word mark Kinder — Relative ground for refusal — Proof of use of the earlier trade mark — Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009’

Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 41, 47-54)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 October 2010 (Case R 815/2009-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Ferrero SpA and Mr Harald Wohlfahrt.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 21 June 2012 — Spain v Commission

(Cases T-264/10 and T-266/10)

‛Cohesion Fund and ERDF operational programme managed by Spain (ESF Combating discrimination 2007-2013 operational programme) — Interim payment application — Decision to suspend the payment deadline because of a significant deficiency in the operation of management and control systems — Actions for annulment — Admissibility — Article 87(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006’

1. Actions for annulment — Actionable measures — Concept — Measures producing binding legal effects — Decision to interrupt the period for settlement of an interim payment application — Measure constituting the final conclusion of a distinct special procedure — Included (Art. 263 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1083/2006) (see paras 10-13, 20)

2. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — EU financing — Regulation No 1083/2006 — Interim payment — Application for payment fulfilling the conditions mentioned in Article 86 — Two-month period for making the interim payment as from the registration of such an application — Interruption of payment after expiry of the period — Not included (Council Regulation No 1083/2006, Arts 87(2), and 91(1)) (see paras 33-36)

Re:

ACTIONS brought against the Commission decisions of 10 May (T-264/10) and 11 May 2010 (T-266/10) informing the Spanish authorities of the suspension of the deadline for the settlement of certain interim payment applications submitted by the Kingdom of Spain.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Joins Cases T-264/10 and T-266/10 for the purposes of the judgment;

2. Annuls the Commission decisions of 10 May and 11 May 2010 informing the Spanish authorities of the suspension of the deadline for the settlement of certain interim payment applications submitted by the Kingdom of Spain;

3. Rejects the application for acknowledgment that the application for payment of interest for late payment is well founded;

4. Declares that that there is no need to adjudicate on the head of claim that the General Court order a measure of organisation of procedure based on Article 64 of its Rules of Procedure;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Assessment of the likelihood of confusion (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 17, 18, 39, 40)

2. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Figurative marks FŁT-1 and FŁT (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19, 20, 22, 28, 37, 42)

3. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Complex mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 23-25)

4. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Coexistence of earlier marks on the market — Relevance (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 55)

Subject of the case

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 October 2010 (Case R 1387/2009-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Impexmetal S.A. and Fabryka Łożysk Tocznych-Kraśnik S.A.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Fabryka Łożysk Tocznych-Kraśnik S.A. to pay the costs.
Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 October 2013 — Merlin and Others v OHIM — Dusyma (Games)

(Case T-231/10)

‛Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a game — Earlier design — Grounds for invalidity — Novelty — Individual character — Distinction between goods and design — Articles 3, 4, 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002’

Community designs — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Design not producing on a well-informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design — Informed user — Concept (Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1), and 25(1)(b)) (see paras 26, 27, 41)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 March 2010 (Case R 879/2009-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Merlin Handelsgesellschaft mbH and Others and Dusyma Kindergartenbedarf GmbH.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 May 2013 — Moselland v OHIM — Renta Siete (DIVINUS)

(Case T-214/10)

‛Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark DIVINUS — Earlier national figurative mark MOSELLAND Divinum — Existence, validity and extent of the protection of the earlier right — Proof’

1. Judicial proceedings — Introduction of new pleas during the proceedings — Conditions — Amplification of an existing plea — Lawfulness (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 48(2), first para.) (see para. 69)

2. Community trade mark — Proceedings before the OHIM authorities — Transmission of communications to the Office — Transmission by fax — Communication incomplete or illegible (Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 80(2)) (see paras 76-78)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 February 2010 (Case R 1204/2009-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Moselland eG — Winzergenossenschaft and Renta Siete, SL.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 22 February 2010 (Case R 1204/2009-2);
Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 September 2013 — Fri-El Acerra v Commission

(Case T‑551/10)

‛State aid — Subsidy for the takeover of a thermoelectric power plant and conversion thereof into a biofuel power plant — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market — Application ratione temporis of the guidelines on national regional aid — Legitimate expectations — Incentive effect’

1. State aid — Prohibition — Exceptions — Discretion of the Commission — Possibility of adopting guidelines — State aid for regional purposes — Judicial review — Limits (Art. 107(3) TFEU; Commission Notice 2006/C 54/13) (see paras 25-28, 48-53)

2. State aid — Prohibition — Exceptions — State aid for regional purposes — Guidelines — Individual aid falling within the scope ratione temporis of those guidelines — Determination — Date of the legally binding measure requiring the competent authority to grant the aid (Art. 107(3) TFEU; Commission Notice 2006/C 54/13, point 105) (see paras 39-41)

3. State aid — Compatibility of aid with the internal market — Possible legitimate expectation of the persons concerned — Protection — Conditions and limits (Art. 108 TFEU) (see paras 43-45, 47, 55-57)

4. State aid — Prohibition — Exceptions — State aid for regional purposes — Criteria — Incentive effect — Introduction of applications before the start of execution of the projects — Adequate and relevant criterion (Art. 107(3) TFEU; Commission Notice 2006/C 54/13, point 38) (see paras 81-85)

5. Actions for annulment — Subject-matter — Decision based on several pillars of reasoning, each sufficient to justify the operative part — Decision on State aid — Illegality affecting only the pillar of reasoning — Action not founded (Arts 108 TFEU and 263 TFEU) (see para. 98)

6. State aid — Administrative procedure — Compatibility of aid with the internal market — Burden of proof on the provider and the potential recipient of the aid (Art. 107(3) TFEU) (see para. 104)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Decision 2011/110/EU of 15 September 2010 on State aid C 8/09 (ex N 357/08) which Italy intends to grant to Fri-El Acerra Srl (OJ 2011 L 46, p. 28).

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — EU financing — Obligation on Member States to establish monitoring and control systems — Serious failings which could lead to systemic irregularities — Consequence — Reduction of financial assistance (Art. 317 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1260/1999, Arts 38(1), and 39(2)(c), and (3); Commission Regulation No 438/2001, Arts 4 and 10) (see paras 50, 51, 91, 92)

2. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — European Regional Development Fund — Clearance of accounts — Disallowance of expenses arising from irregularities in applying EU rules — Challenge by the Member State concerned — Burden of proof — Allocation between the Commission and the Member State (Council Regulation No 1260/1999; Commission Regulation No 438/2001) (see para. 56)

3. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — European Regional Development Fund — Decision to reduce financial assistance — Need for a prior cooperation procedure (Council Regulation No 1260/1999, Arts 38 and 39) (see para. 97)

4. EU law — Principles — Proportionality — Scope — Complete withdrawal of financial assistance granted by the ERDF — Lawfulness — Conditions — Burden of proof — Finding of defects in the control system established by a Member State — Flat-rate correction of 10% of expenses — Lawfulness (Art. 5(4) TEU; Council Regulation No 1260/1999, Art. 39(3)) (see paras 108, 115, 116)

5. Acts of the institutions — Rules of administrative conduct of general scope — Measure designed to produce external effects — Autolimitation of the discretion of the institution adopting the measure (see para. 110)

6. Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — Decision of the Commission reducing the amount of EU financial assistance (Art. 296 TFEU) (see paras 125, 129, 130)

7. Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — Plea based on lack or inadequacy of reasoning — Plea alleging incorrectness of the statement of reasons — Distinction (Art. 296 TFEU) (see paras 126, 128)

8. Economic, social and territorial cohesion — Structural assistance — EU financing granted for national projects — Suspension or reduction of financial assistance granted for a national project — Procedure distinct from and independent of an action for failure to fulfil obligations (Art. 258 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1260/1999, Art. 39) (see paras 140-143)

Subject of the case

Re:

APPLICATION to annul Commission Decision C(2009) 10350 final of 22 December 2009 reducing the financial assistance from the European Regional Development Fund allocated to the Italian Republic pursuant to Commission Decision C(2000) 2349 of 8 August 2000, approving the regional operational programme POR Puglia, in respect of the period 2000-2006, under objective No 1.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Statement of reasons for decisions — Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 — Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75) (see para. 18)

2. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19, 20)

3. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Decision of an OHIM body forming part of the context of the decision of the Board of Appeal (see para. 26)

Subject of the case

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the first Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2010 (Case R 63/2010‑1) relating to opposition proceedings between the Camera di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona and Mr Alberto Zenato.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 September 2010 (Case R 63/2010‑1);

2. Orders OHIM to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.