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

Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT8)

(Case T-420/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark GT8 - Earlier EU figurative mark GT - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Relevant public - Level of attention - Action manifestly well founded)

(2021/C 310/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and M. Maier, lawyer)

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: Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1611/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe and Huawei Technologies.

Operative part of the order

1. The decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1611/2019-4) is annulled.

2. EUIPO shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd.

(1) OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 25 May 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services)

(Case T-233/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 278/61)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Rochem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Rochem Marine Srl (Genoa, Italy) (represented by: R. Gioia and L. Mansi, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 February 2020 (Case R 1544/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Rochem Marine and Rochem Group.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Rochem Group AG and Rochem Marine Srl.

(1) OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.
Order of the General Court of 28 July 2021 — Dual Star Logistic and Others v Parliament and Council

(Case T-645/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Road transport - Regulation (EU) 2020/1055 - Conditions relating to the requirement of establishment of undertakings - Return of vehicles to the operational centre in the Member State of origin within a maximum period of eight weeks - Professional association - Standing to bring proceedings - Act not of individual concern - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 412/09)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Dual Star Logistic SRL (Bucharest, Romania), Eliton Trans SRL (Piteşti, Romania), Agexim Spedition SRL (Piteşti), SC A & C International Road Cargo SRL (Piteşti), Uniunea Naţională a Transportatorilor Rutieri din România (UNTRR) (Bucharest) (represented by: R. Martens, lawyer)

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: R. van de Westelaken and A. Tamás, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Norberg, L. Vétillard and S. Emmerechts, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Article 1(3) of Regulation (EU) 2020/1055 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 amending Regulations (EC) No 1071/2009, (EC) No 1072/2009 and (EU) No 1024/2012 with a view to adapting them to developments in the road transport sector (OJ 2020 L 249, p. 17).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. There is no longer any need to rule on Romania’s application for leave to intervene.

3. Dual Star Logistic SRL, Eliton Trans SRL, Agexim Spedition SRL, SC A & C International Road Cargo SRL and Uniunea Naţională a Transportatorilor Rutieri din România (UNTRR) shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, apart from the costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

4. Dual Star Logistic, Eliton Trans, Agexim Spedition, SC A & C International Road Cargo, Uniunea Naţională a Transportatorilor Rutieri din România (UNTRR), the Parliament, the Council and Romania shall bear their own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Order of the General Court of 8 June 2021 — Price v Council

(Case T-231/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Area of freedom, security and justice - Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom - Council Decision on the conclusion of the Agreement on withdrawal - United Kingdom nationals - Loss of EU citizenship - Act not of individual concern - Non-regulatory act - Inadmissibility)

(2021/C 310/36)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: David Price (Le Dorat, France) (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant): Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, R. Meyer and M. Joséphidès, Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment in part of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 7) and of Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene submitted by the European Commission.

3. Mr David Price is ordered to bear, in addition to his own costs, those incurred by the Council of the European Union, including those regarding the application for interim measures, with the exception of those related to the application for leave to intervene.

4. Mr Price, the Council and the Commission shall each bear their own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

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

Order of the General Court of 26 October 2021 — Puma v EUIPO — Caterpillar (SPEEDCAT)

(Case T-515/20) (1)

(2021/C 513/54)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 329, 5.10.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 22 September 2021 — Alteryx v EUIPO — Allocate Software (ALLOCATE)

(Case T-476/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - Withdrawal of the application for revocation - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 471/71)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Alteryx, Inc. (Irvine, California, United States) (represented by: A. Poulter and M. Holah, Solicitors)

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: Allocate Software Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Howe, QC, A. Chantrielle, Barrister, E. Powell and B. Milloy, Solicitors)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 May 2020 (Case R 1709/2019-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Allocate Software and Alteryx.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. Alteryx, Inc. and Allocate Software Ltd shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

(1) OJ C 313, 21.9.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 17 January 2022 — Car-Master 2 v Commission

(Case T-743/20) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Motor vehicle repair market in Poland - Decision rejecting a complaint - Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Case dealt with by a national competition authority - Action lacking any foundation in law)

(2022/C 119/62)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Car-Master 2 sp. z o.o. sp.k. (Krakow, Poland) (represented by: M. Miśkowicz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Meessen, J. Szczodrowski and I. Zaloguin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 7369 final of 22 October 2020 (Case AT.40665 — Toyota Motor Poland) rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant alleging infringements of Article 101 TFEU.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

2. Car-Master 2 sp. z o.o. sp.k shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 72, 1.3.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 1 December 2021 — OJ v Commission

(Case T-709/20 R)

(Application for interim measures - Civil service - Recruitment - Open competition - EPSO decision to refuse the extension of the dates of the multiple choice computer-based tests - Application for interim measures - No urgency)

(2022/C 73/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: OJ (represented by: H.-E. von Harpe, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Melo Sampaio and L. Hohenecker, agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking suspension of the selection procedure of Open Competition EPSO/AD/380/19 concerning the establishment for the Commission of a reserve list of administrators in the field of international cooperation and aid to non-member countries.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed;
Order of the General Court of 22 November 2022 — Validity v Commission

(Case T-640/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents relating to a draft call for proposals co-funded by the ERDF - Documents originating from a Member State - Partial refusal of access - Disclosure after the action had been brought - Interest in bringing proceedings ceasing to exist - No need to adjudicate in part - Request to modify the application - Partial inadmissibility)

(2023/C 35/75)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Validity Foundation — Mental Disability Advocacy Centre (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: B. Van Vooren and R. Oyarzabal Arigita, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment, first, of Commission Decision C(2020) 5540 final of 6 August 2020, by which the Commission refused it access to documents relating to a draft call for proposals from the Hungarian authorities and, secondly, of Commission Decision C(2021) 2834 final of 19 April 2021 granting it access to those documents.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2020) 5540 final of 6 August 2020, by which the Commission refused Validity Foundation — Mental Disability Advocacy Centre access to documents relating to a draft call for proposals of the Hungarian authorities.

2. The remainder of the action is dismissed as inadmissible.

3. Each party is ordered to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 9, 11.1.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 7 March 2022 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Rudolf Böckenholt (LLOYD’S)

(Case T-400/20) (1)

(2022/C 198/93)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 22 July 2021 — CCPL and Others v Commission

(Case T-130/21 R)

(Interim relief - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Retail food packaging market - Decision imposing fines - Financial guarantee - 2006 Guidelines on the method for setting fines - Ability to pay - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No prima facie case)

(2021/C 391/25)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicants: CCPL — Consorzio Cooperative di Produzione e Lavoro SC (Reggio Emilia, Italy), Coopbox Group SpA (Bibbiano, Italy) and Coopbox Eastern s.r.o. (Nové Mesto nad Váhom, Slovakia) (represented by: E. Cucchiara and E. Rocchi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Rossi and T. Baumé, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking suspension of the operation of Commission Decision C(2020) 8940 final of 17 December 2020 replacing the fines set by Commission Decision C(2015) 4336 final of 24 June 2015 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement to the extent that it concerns CCPL — Consorzio Cooperative di Produzione e Lavoro SC, Coopbox Group SpA and Coopbox Eastern s.r.o. (Case AT.39563 — Retail food packaging), in so far as it requires the applicants to provide a financial guarantee or to make provisional payment of the fines imposed.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is dismissed.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 28 May 2021 — Corman v Commission

(Case T-25/21) (1)

(2021/C 278/96)

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 72, 1.3.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 22 October 2021 — Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior v Commission

(Case T-22/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance - Non-member State - National public procurement - Termination of the contract by the contracting authority - Request for enforcement by the contracting authority of a bank guarantee - Countersignature by the Head of the EU Delegation in the Non-member State or his deputy - Lack of jurisdiction)

(2021/C 513/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: D. Luff and R. Sciaudone, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Bianchi and T. Van Noyen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s letter of 5 November 2020, with reference GK/Regio.ddg.d. 1(2020)6793282, concerning the enforcement of the bank guarantee requested by the Turkish Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Equinoccio-Compañía de Comercio Exterior, SL shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 1 September 2021 — Be Smart v Commission

(Case T-18/21) (1)

(State aid - Complaint - Action for failure to act - Commission’s adoption of a position after the action was brought and which put an end to the failure to act - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 431/45)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Be Smart Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: F. Satta, G. Roberti, A. Romano and I. Perego, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 265 TFEU seeking a declaration that the Commission acted unlawfully by failing to define its position on the complaint made by the applicant on 15 October 2014 concerning alleged State aid measures granted by the Italian Republic to the interuniversity consortium Cineca.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

2. The European Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Be Smart Srl.

(1) OJ C 79, 8.3.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 7 December 2021 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Yajun (PREMILITY)

(Case T-46/21) (1)

(2022/C 95/65)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.
Order of the General Court of 4 November 2021 — Stichting Comité N 65 Ondergronds Helvoirt v EEA

(Case T-5/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Environment - Directive 2008/50/EC - Obligation of Member States to protect and improve ambient air quality - Refusal of the EEA to refer a question to the Court - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Request for internal review - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 24/50)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Stichting Comité N 65 Ondergronds Helvoirt (Helvoirt, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Gebruers, lawyer)

Defendant: European Environment Agency (represented by: O. Cornu, acting as Agent, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision that was allegedly adopted by the EEA in an email of 9 November 2020 and by which it refused to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union on the interpretation of a provision of Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe (OJ 2008 L 152, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Stichting Comité N 65 Ondergronds Helvoirt shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Environment Agency (EEA).

(1) OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the General Court of 11 February 2022 — Calrose Rice v EUIPO — Ricegrowers (Sunwhite)

(Case T-459/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Sunwhite - Earlier national figurative mark Sunwhite - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2022/C 148/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Calrose Rice (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: H. Raychev, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Ricegrowers Ltd (Leeton, New South Wales, Australia) (represented by: C. Menebröcker and C. Böhmer, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 June 2021 (Case R 2465/2020 4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ricegrowers and Calrose Rice.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Calrose Rice shall pay the costs of the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 382, 20.9.2021.
Official Journal of the European Union

Order of the President of the General Court of 24 January 2022 — Společnost pro eHealth databáze v Commission

(Case T-731/21 R)

(Application for interim measures - Grant agreement concluded in the context of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (2007-2013) - Recovery of sums paid - Application for suspension of operation - No urgency)

(2022/C 119/70)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Společnost pro eHealth databáze, a.s. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: P. Konečný, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà, B. Araujo Arce and J. Hradil, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking suspension of the operation of Commission Decision C(2021) 6597 final of 2 September 2021 concerning the recovery from the applicant of a sum of EUR 861 263, together with default interest and an amount for each additional day of delay as from 1 October 2021.

Operative part of the order

1. The application for interim measures is rejected.
Order of the General Court of 18 March 2022 — Saure v Commission

(Case T-232/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Correspondence of the Commission concerning the quantities and delivery times of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccines - Implied refusal of access - Express decision adopted after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate - Requests to amend the form of order sought - Lis pendens - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2022/C 207/55)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Hans-Wilhelm Saure (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: C. Partsch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara, K. Herrmann and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the implied decision of 30 April 2021, and, after amendment of the forms of order sought, of the express decision of 13 July 2021, by which the Commission rejected his confirmatory request for access to certain documents.

Operative part of the order

1. There is no longer any need to rule on the form of order seeking annulment of the implied decision of the European Commission of 30 April 2021 rejecting the confirmatory request for access to certain documents.

2. The action as to the remainder is dismissed as being manifestly inadmissible.

3. The Commission shall bear its own costs and pay those of Mr Hans-Wilhelm Saure pertaining to the application and for the application for a declaration that there is no need to adjudicate.

4. Mr Saure shall bear his own costs and pay those of the Commission pertaining to the request to amend the application.

(1) OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.
Judgment of the General Court of 24 February 2022 — Thomas and Julien v Council

(Case T-442/21) (1)

(Action for annulment - Area of freedom, security and justice - Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and Euratom, of the one part, and the United Kingdom, of the other part - Council decision on the conclusion of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement - Act not of individual concern - Non-regulatory act - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 171/51)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Rhiannon Thomas (London, United Kingdom), Michaël Julien (Weybridge, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, J. Ciantar and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

By their action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicants, who are United Kingdom nationals residing in the United Kingdom, seek partial annulment, first, of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the other part (OJ 2021 L 149, p. 10) and, second, of Council Decision (EU) 2021/689 of 29 April 2021 on the conclusion, on behalf of the Union, of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the other part, and of the Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland concerning security procedures for exchanging and protecting classified information (OJ 2021 L 149, p. 2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Declares that there is no longer any need to rule on the application to intervene of the European Commission;

3. Orders Ms Rhiannon Thomas and Mr Michaël Julien to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union, with the exception of those relating to the application to intervene;

4. Orders Ms Thomas, Mr Julien, the Council and the Commission each to bear their own costs relating to the application to intervene.

(1) OJ C 412, 11.10.2021.