ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 226/22

Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2011 — Solvay Solexis v Commission

(Case T-195/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Duration of infringement - Concept of ‘agreement’ and ‘concerted practice’ - Access to the file - Fines - Equal treatment - Leniency Notice - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based)

2011/C 226/42

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Solvay Solexis SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: T. Salonico and G.L. Zampa, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by V. Di Bucci and F. Amato, and subsequently by V. Di Bucci and V. Bottka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 1766 final of 3 May 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.620 — Hydrogen peroxide and perborate) and for a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Solvay Solexis SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 133/21

Judgment of the General Court of 21 March 2012 — Ireland and Others v Commission

(Joined Cases T-50/06 RENV, T-56/06 RENV, T-60/06 RENV, T-62/06 RENV and T-69/06 RENV) (1)

(State aid - Directive 92/81/EEC - Excise duty on mineral oils - Mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production - Exemption from excise duty - Whether the exemption complies with a Council decision of authorisation under Article 8(4) of Directive 92/81 - Presumption of legality attaching to European Union measures - Legal certainty - Sound administration)

2012/C 133/39

Languages of the case: English, French and Italian

Parties

Applicants: Ireland (represented initially by D. O’Hagan and subsequently by E. Creedon, acting as Agents, and P. McGarry, Barrister) (Case T-50/06 RENV); French Republic (represented by G. de Bergues and J. Gstalter, acting as Agents) (Case T-56/06 RENV); Italian Republic (represented by G. Aiello, G. De Bellis and S. Fiorentino, avvocati dello Stato) (Case T-60/06 RENV); Eurallumina SpA (Portoscuso, Italy) (represented by R. Denton and L. Martin Alegi, Solicitors) (Case T-62/06 RENV); and Aughinish Alumina Ltd (Askeaton, Ireland) (represented by J. Handoll and C. Waterson, Solicitors) (Case T-69/06 RENV)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, N. Khan, D. Grespan and K. Walkerová, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2006/323/EC of 7 December 2005 concerning the exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production in Gardanne, in the Shannon region and in Sardinia respectively implemented by France, Ireland and Italy (OJ 2006 L 119, p. 12).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision 2006/323/EC of 7 December 2005 concerning the exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production in Gardanne, in the Shannon region and in Sardinia respectively implemented by France, Ireland and Italy, in so far as it finds, or is based on the finding, that the exemptions from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production granted by the French Republic, Ireland and the Italian Republic until 31 December 2003 constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC and in so far as it orders the French Republic, Ireland and the Italian Republic to take all measures necessary to recover those exemptions from the beneficiaries to the extent that the latter did not pay excise duty at the rate of at least EUR 13,01 per 1 000 kg of heavy fuel oils;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Ireland in Case T-50/06 RENV, by the French Republic in Case T-56/06 RENV, by the Italian Republic in Case T-60/06 RENV, by Eurallumina Spa in Case T-62/06 RENV and by Aughinish Alumina Ltd in Case T-69/06 RENV, including the costs of the application for interim measures in Case T-69/06 R.

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/11

Judgment of the General Court of 16 November 2011 — Álvarez v Commission

(Case T-78/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Concept of undertaking - Imputability of the unlawful conduct - Presumption of innocence)

2012/C 6/17

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Armando Álvarez, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented initially by: E. Garayar Gutiérrez and A. García Castillo, then by E. Garayar Gutiérrez, M. Troncoso Ferrer and C. Ruixó Claramunt, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial bags), concerning a cartel on the market for plastic industrial bags, and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Armando Álvarez, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 121, 20.5.2006.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 355/16

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2012 — BAM NBM Wegenbouw and HBG Civiel v Commission

(Case T-354/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Netherlands market in road pavement bitumen - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Existence and classification of an agreement - Restriction of competition - Guidelines on horizontal cooperation agreements - Rights of the defence - Fines - Duration of the infringement)

2012/C 355/30

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicants: BAM NBM Wegenbouw BV (Bunnik, Netherlands); and HBG Civiel BV (Gouda, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Biesheuvel and J. de Pree, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet, A. Nijenhuis and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 4090 final of 13 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.456 — Bitumen (Netherlands)), in so far as it concerns the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BAM NBM Wegenbouw BV and HBG Civiel BV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 20, 27.1.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 355/18

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2012 — Ballast Nedam v Commission

(Case T-361/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Netherlands market in road pavement bitumen - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Imputability of the unlawful conduct - Rights of the defence - Effects in relation to third parties of a judgment annulling a measure)

2012/C 355/36

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Ballast Nedam NV (Nieuwegein (Netherlands)) (represented: initially by A. Bosman and J. van de Hel, and subsequently by A. Bosman and E. Oude Elferink, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by A. Bouquet, A. Nijenhuis and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, Agents, assisted initially by F. Wijckmans, F. Tuytschaever and L. Gyselen, and subsequently by F. Wijckmans and F. Tuytschaever, lawyers)

Re:

Application, principally, for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 4090 final of 13 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.456 — Bitumen (Netherlands)), in so far as it concerns the applicant, and, in the alternative (i) application for annulment in part of that decision in so far as it sets the duration of the infringement with respect to the applicant and (ii) application for a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ballast Nedam NV to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 20, 27.1.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 197/22

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 25 June 2008 — Zipcar, Inc. v OHIM — Canary Islands Car (ZIPCAR)

(Case T-36/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ZIPCAR - Earlier national word mark CICAR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 197/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Zipcar, Inc. (Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States) (represented by: M. Elmslie, Solicitor, and N. Saunders, Barrister,)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Botis, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Canary Islands Car, SL (San Bartolome, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 November 2006 (case R 122/2006-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Canary Islands Car, SL and Zipcar, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action.

2. Orders Zipcar, Inc. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 14.4.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 6/24

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 19 November 2008 — Galderma v OHIM — Lelas (Nanolat)

(Case T-6/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark Nanolat - Earlier national word mark TANNOLACT - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 6/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Galderma SA (Cham, Switzerland) (represented by: N. Hebeis, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Tihomir Lelas (Zagreb, Croatia) (represented by: H.-J. Omsels, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 October 2006 (Case R 146/2006-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Galderma SA and Mr Tihomir Lelas

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. dismisses the action;

2. orders Galderma SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/33

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 October 2008 — Agrar-Invest-Tatschl v Commission

(Case T-51/07) (1)

(Post-clearance recovery of import duties - Sugar originating from Croatia - Article 220(2)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Notice to importers published in the Official Journal - Good faith)

(2008/C 301/53)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Agrar-Invest-Tatschl GmbH (St. Andrä im Lavanttal, Austria) (represented by: U. Schrömbges and O. Wenzlaff, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Alcover San Pedro and S. Schønberg, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

ACTION for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2006) 5789 final of 4 December 2006.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Agrar-Invest-Tatschl GmbH to bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 32/31

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 December 2008 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Metronia (METRONIA)

(Case T-290/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative trade mark METRONIA - Earlier national figurative trade mark METRO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 32/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance: Metronia, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Riera Blanco, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 May 2007 (Case R 1315/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG and Metronia, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

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 29 May 2007 (Case R 1315/2006-2);

2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG;

3. Orders Metronia SA to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 235, 6.10.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 19/28

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 December 2008 — Ebro Puleva v OHIM — Berenguel (BRILLO'S)

(Case T-275/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark BRILLO'S - Earlier national figurative marks featuring the word element ‘brillante’ - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 19/52)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Ebro Puleva, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: P. Casamitjana Lleonart, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Montalto, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Luis Berenguel, SL (El Barranquete-Níjar, Spain) (represented by: C. Hernández Hernández)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 May 2007 (Case R 493/2006-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Ebro Puleva, SA and Luis Berenguel, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Ebro Puleva, SA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 235, 6.10.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 113/35

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 25 March 2009 — Kaul v OHIM — Bayer (ARCOL)

(Case T-402/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ARCOL - Earlier Community word mark CAPOL - Implementation by OHIM of a judgment annulling a decision of one of its Boards of Appeal - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Rights of the defence - Article 8(1)(b), Article 61(2), Article 63(6), Article 73, second sentence, and Article 74(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

2009/C 113/71

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kaul GmbH (Elmshorn, Germany) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Bayer AG (Leverkusen, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 August 2007 (Case R 782/2000-2), concerning opposition proceedings between Kaul GmbH and Bayer AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kaul GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 8, 12.1.2008.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 55/24

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 14 January 2009 — Commission v Rednap

(Case T-352/07) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Contracts concluded in the context of the fourth framework programme of activities in the fields of research and technological development and demonstration - Rise and Healthline projects - Non-compliance of part of the declared expenditure with the contractual provisions - Repayment of part of the advances paid - Default proceedings)

(2009/C 55/43)

Language of the case: Swedish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Triantafyllou and J. Enegren, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Rednap AB (Malmö, Sweden)

Re:

Action brought by the Commission under Article 238 EC seeking repayment of part of the advances paid by the Community under the contracts DE 3010 (DE) Rise and HC 4007 (HC) Healthline, and payment of default interest

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. orders Rednap AB to repay to the Commission the sum of EUR 334 375,49;

2. orders Rednap to pay to the Commission default interest on the sum of EUR 219 125,22 from 1 June 2002 at the statutory rate under Greek law until the debt is totally discharged, which rate may not, however, as from 1 August 2007, exceed 11,75 % per annum;

3. orders Rednap to pay to the Commission default interest on the sum of EUR 115 250,27 from 31 May 2002 at the statutory rate under Greek law until the debt is totally discharged, which rate may not, however, as from 1 August 2007, exceed 11,75 % per annum;

4. orders Rednap to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 193/20

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 1 July 2009 — Okalux v OHIM — Messe Düsseldorf (OKATECH)

(Case T-419/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Forfeiture proceedings - Community word mark OKATECH - Partial revocation - Period allowed for appeal - Articles 57 and 77a of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 58 and 80 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Principles of protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty - Right to a hearing)

2009/C 193/29

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Okalux GmbH (Marktheidenfeld, Germany) (represented by: M. Beckensträter, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schäffner, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Messe Düsseldorf GmbH (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented initially by: I Friedhoff, and subsequently by: S. von Petersdorff-Campen, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 September 2007 (Case R 766/2007-2) concerning forfeiture proceedings between Messe Düsseldorf GmbH and Okalux GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Okalux GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 8, 12.1.2008.
1.

annuls the decisions of the First Board of Appeal of Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 10 July 2007 (Case R 119/2007-1) and 12 September 2007 (Case R 120/2007-1) to the extent that they refuse the registration as Community trade marks of the word signs P@YWEB CARD and PAYWEB CARD for photographic, cinematographic, signalling, checking (supervision) apparatus and instruments; apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of sound or images; recording discs; electronic notebooks; automatic vending machines, video tapes. distributors of banknotes, slips, bank statements and extract bank statements, cameras (cinematographic apparatus) video cameras, video cassettes, CD-ROMS, bar code readers, compact discs (audio-video), optical compact discs, counterfeit money detectors, floppy discs, magnetic data carriers, optical data carriers, video screens, data processing apparatus, intercommunication apparatus, interfaces (IT), readers (IT), software (recorded programs), monitors (computer programs), computers, computer input and output devices, recorded computer programmes, recorded operating system programs (for computers), radiotelephones, receivers (audio, video), telephone apparatus, television apparatus, apparatus for time recording, transmitters (telecommunications), central processing units (processors) within Class 9 and certain information (news) services inter alia in the banking sector, radiotelephonic communications, telephone communications, sending of telegrams, transmission of telegrams, broadcasting of television programmes, radiotelephonic transmissions, television transmissions, renting of telecommunication apparatus, renting of apparatus for transmission of messages, rental of telephones, mobile radiotelephony, telephone services within Class 38 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 267/56

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 16 September 2009 — JanSport Apparel v OHIM (BUILT TO RESIST)

(Case T-80/07) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark BUILT TO RESIST - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2009/C 267/96

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: JanSport Apparel Corp. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: C. Bercial Arias, C. Casalonga and K. Dimidjian-Lecompte, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Laitinen initially, and subsequently by O. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of 12 January 2007 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM (Case R 1090/2006-2) concerning an application for registration of the word mark BUILT TO RESIST as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders JanSport Apparel Corp. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 256/23

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 September 2009 — El Morabit v Council

(Joined Cases T-37/07 and T-323/07) (1)

(Common Foreign and Security Policy - Restrictive measures with a view to combating terrorism - Freezing of funds - List of persons, groups and entities - Action for annulment)

2009/C 256/42

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: Mohamed El Morabit (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: U. Sarikaya, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Finnegan, G. Van Hegelsom and B. Driessen, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels and M. De Mol, and, in Case T-37/07, M. de Grave and, in Case T-323/07, Y. de Vries and M. Noort, Agents); and Commission of the European Communities (represented: in Case T-37/07 by S. Boelaert and J. Aquilina, and in Case T-323/07 by P. van Nuffel and S. Boelaert, Agents)

Re:

Action for the annulment, in part, of, first, Council Decision 2007/445/EC of 28 June 2007 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism and repealing Decisions 2006/379/EC and 2006/1008/EC (OJ 2007 L 169, p. 58) and, second, Council Decision 2006/1008/EC of 21 December 2006 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (OJ 2006 L 379, p. 123), in so far as the name of the applicant appears on the lists of persons, groups and entities to which those provisions apply.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the actions;

2. Orders Mr Mohamed El Morabit to bear his own costs and pay those of the Council;

3. Orders the Commission of the European Communities and the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 82, 14. 4. 2007.