ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 205/32

Order of the General Court of 28 April 2015 — Dyckerhoff Polska v Commission

(Case T-284/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Time-limit for bringing an action - Out of time - No force majeure or unforeseeable circumstances - Manifest inadmissibility - Plea of illegality))

(2015/C 205/43)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Dyckerhoff Polska sp. z o.o. (Nowiny, Poland) (represented by: K. Kowalczyk, lawyer)

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

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 240, p. 27).

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

2. There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene made by the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament.

3. Dyckerhoff Polska sp. z o.o. shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 245, 28.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 155/40

Order of the General Court of 16 March 2015 — Mat Foundries Europe v Commission

(Case T-309/14) (1)

(2015/C 155/57)

Language of the case: German

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

(1) OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 245/19

Order of the General Court of 22 May 2015 — Röchling Oertl Kunststofftechnik v Commission

(Case T-286/14) (1)

((State aid - Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings - Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU - Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 245/22)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Röchling Oertl Kunststofftechnik GmbH (Brensbach, Germany) (represented by: T. Volz, B. Wißmann, M. Püstow, M. Ringel, C. Oehme and T. Wielsch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and by A. Luke and C. Maurer, lawyers)

Re:

Application to annul in part Commission decision C (2013) 4424 final of 18 December 2013 to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU regarding measures implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users (State aid SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN)).

Operative part of the order

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

2. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for intervention submitted by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.

3. Röchling Oertl Kunststofftechnik GmbH shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

4. The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 221/19

Order of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Klar and Fernandez Fernandez v Commission

(Case T-665/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Staff Committee of the Commission - Revocation by the Luxembourg local section of one of its members appointed to the central staff committee - Decision refusing to recognise the lawfulness of the revocation decision - Action at first instance dismissed as manifestly inadmissible - Non respect of the pre-litigation procedure - Measure adversely affecting a person - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded))

(2015/C 221/26)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Robert Klar (Grevenmacher, Luxembourg) and Francisco Fernandez Fernandez (Steinsel, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Salerno, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and J. Currall, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 16 July 2014 in Klar and Fernandez Fernandez v Commission (F-114/13, ECR-SC, EU:F:2014:192), seeking to have that order set aside.

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed;

2. Mr Robert Klar and Mr Francisco Fernandez Fernandez are ordered to bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the context of the present proceedings.

(1) OJ C 380, 27.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 294/54

Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Harz Guss Zorge v Commission

(Case T-177/14) (1)

((State aid - Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings - Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU - Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate - Action for annulment - Application to amend the form of order sought - No new information - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 294/65)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Harz Guss Zorge GmbH (Zorge, Germany) (represented by: H. Höfler, C. Kahle and V. Winkler, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and by C. Renner, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: EFTA Surveillance Authority (represented by: initially X. Lewis, M. Schneider and A. Steinarsdóttir, then X. Lewis, M. Schneider, M. Moustakali and C. Perrin, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application to annul in part Commission decision C (2013) 4424 final of 18 December 2013 to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU regarding measures implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users (State aid SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN)).

Operative part of the order

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

2. The application seeking that the form of order sought in the present action be amended to cover Commission decision C (2014) 8786 final of 25 November 2014 relating to State Aid SA. 33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users is rejected as inadmissible.

3. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications for intervention submitted by Flachglas Torgau GmbH and Saint-Gobain Isover G+H AG, by Kronotex GmbH & Co. KG and Kronoply GmbH, by Bayer MaterialScience AG, by Sabic Polyolefine GmbH, by Ineos Manufacturing Deutschland GmbH, Ineos Phenol GmbH and Ineos Vinyls Deutschland GmbH, and by Advansa GmbH, Akzo Nobel Industrial Chemicals GmbH, Aurubis AG, CBW Chemie GmbH, CFB Chemische Fabrik Brunsbüttel GmbH & Co. KG, Clariant Produkte (Deutschland) GmbH, Dralon GmbH, Hahl Filaments GmbH, Messer Produktionsgesellschaft mbH Siegen, Messer Produktionsgesellschaft mbH Salzgitter, Nabaltec AG, Siltronic AG and Wacker Chemie AG.

4. Harz Guss Zorge GmbH shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

5. The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
Case T-134/14: Order of the General Court of 8 June 2015 — Germany v Commission

Order of the General Court of 8 June 2015 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-134/14) ( 1 )

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

( 1 ) OJ C 142, 12.5.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 311/46

Order of the General Court of 24 June 2015 — Wm. Wrigley Jr. v OHIM (Extra)

(Case T-553/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community figurative mark Extra - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law))

(2015/C 311/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey, S. Brandstätter and C. Schmitt, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 May 2014 (Case R 218/2014-5) relating to an application for registration of the figurative sign Extra as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 294/67

Order of the General Court of 9 June 2015 — Vinnolit v Commission

(Case T-318/14) (1)

((State aid - Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings - Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU - Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 294/82)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Vinnolit GmbH & Co. KG (Ismaning, Germany) (represented by: M. Geipel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and by H. Wollmann, lawyer)

Re:

Application to annul in part Commission decision C (2013) 4424 final of 18 December 2013 to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU regarding measures implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users (State aid SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN)).

Operative part of the order

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

2. There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for intervention submitted by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.

3. Vinnolit GmbH & Co. KG shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission.

4. The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/58

Order of the General Court of 22 July 2015 — Swedish Match North Europe v OHIM — Skruf Snus (Oral snuff packages)

(Case T-196/14) (1)

(2015/C 381/71)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) C 151, 19.5.2014.
1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action in so far as it seeks the annulment of letter EASO/ED/2014/134 of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) of 10 June 2014 refusing access to the operational plan to deploy the European Union support team in Bulgaria.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/60

Order of the General Court of 15 September 2015 — Drex Technologies v Council

(Case T-603/14) (1)

(2015/C 381/82)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 361, 13.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 381/34

Order of the General Court of 9 September 2015 — Monster Energy v OHIM (Representation of a peace symbol)

(Case T-633/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Period for bringing an action - Point from which time starts to run - Notification of the Board of Appeal’s decision by fax machine - Receipt of the fax - Lateness - No force majeure or unforeseeable circumstances - Manifest inadmissibility))

(2015/C 381/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Company (Corona, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 December 2013 (Case R 1285/2013-1) concerning an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a figurative sign representing a peace symbol.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Monster Energy Company shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 127, 20.4.2015.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 27/57

Order of the General Court of 23 November 2015 — Milchindustrie-Verband and Deutscher Raiffeisenverband v Commission

(Case T-670/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020 - Association - Members not directly concerned - Inadmissibility))

(2016/C 027/73)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Milchindustrie-Verband eV (Berlin, Germany) and Deutscher Raiffeisenverband eV (Berlin) (represented by: I. Zenke and T. Heymann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann, T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s Communication of 28 June 2014 entitled ‘Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020’ (OJ 2014 C 200, p. 1), in so far as the sector for the operation of dairies and cheese-making (NACE 10.51) is not mentioned in Annex 3 to that communication.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2. Milchindustrie-Verband eV and Deutscher Raiffeisenverband eV shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

(1) OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 389/57

Order of the General Court of 5 October 2015 — Grigoriadis and Others v Parliament and Others

(Case T-413/14) (1)

((Action for failure to act and for damages - Restructuring of the Greek public debt - Involvement of the private sector - Loss consisting in the reduction of sums owed - Statements by the Heads of State or Government of the euro area and the EU institutions - Eurogroup statement - Failure to specify the causal link with the loss pleaded - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 389/65)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicants: Grigoris Grigoriadis (Athens, Greece), Faidra Grigoriadou (Athens), Ioannis Tsolias (Thessaloniki, Greece), Dimitrios Alexopoulos (Thessaloniki), Nikolaos Papageorgiou (Athens) and Ioannis Marinopoulos (Athens) (represented by: C. Papadimitriou, lawyer)

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by: A. Troupiotis and L. Visaggio, acting as Agents); European Council; Eurogroup; Council of the European Union (represented by: A. de Gregorio Merino and M. Balta, acting as Agents); European Commission (represented by: J.-P. Keppenne and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents); and European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: P. Papapaschalis and P. Senkovic, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, an application for a declaration that the defendants unlawfully failed to act in order for the bonds held by the applicants not to be affected by the plan for private sector involvement in the debt financing programme (PSI), reducing the value of the Greek State’s debt, and second, an application seeking compensation for the loss allegedly suffered by the applicants following that unlawful failure to act.

Operative part of the order

1. The action is dismissed.

2. Grigoris Grigoriadis, Faidra Grigoriadou, Ioannis Tsolias, Dimitrios Alexopoulos, Nikolaos Papageorgiou and Ioannis Marinopoulos shall pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 439, 8.12.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 98/61

Order of the General Court of 19 January 2016 — Loewe Technologies v OHIM — DNS International (SoundVision)

(Case T-623/14) (1)

(2016/C 098/79)

Language of the case: French

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

(1) OJ C 351, 6.10.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 38/53

Order of the General Court of 30 November 2015 — Gmina Miasto Gdynia and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo v Commission

(Case T-215/14) (1)

((Action for annulment - Replacement of the contested act during proceedings - Amendment of the form of order sought - Parallel action against the new decision - No need to adjudicate))

(2016/C 038/69)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicants: Gmina Miasto Gdynia (Gdynia, Poland) (represented by: T. Koncewicz and K. Gruszecka-Spychała, lawyers) and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo sp. Z o.o. (Gdynia) (represented initially by T. Koncewicz and K. Gruszecka-Spychała, and subsequently by P. Rosiak, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Grespan, S. Noë and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicants: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Re:

Initially, an application for the annulment of Commission Decision 2014/883/EU of 11 February 2014 on the measure SA.35388 (13/C) (ex 13/NN and ex 12/N) — Poland — Setting up the Gdynia-Kosakowo Airport (OJ 2014 L 357, p. 51), and, subsequently, an application for the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2015/1586 of 26 February 2015 on the measure SA.35388 (13/C) (ex 13/NN and ex 12/N) — Poland — Setting up the Gdynia-Kosakowo airport (OJ 2015 L 250, p. 165) replacing Decision 2014/883.

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 shall pay the costs incurred by Gmina Miasto Gdynia and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo sp. Z o.o. as regards the main proceedings.

3. Gmina Miasto Gdynia and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo shall bear their own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by the Commission as regards the proceedings for interim relief.

4. The Republic of Poland shall bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 175, 10.6.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 22/33

Order of the General Court of 1 December 2016 — STC v Commission

(Case T-355/14) (1)

((Public services contracts - Tendering procedure - Construction and maintenance of a tri-generation plant with a gas turbine - Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer - Withdrawl of the contested measure - No need to adjudicate))

(2017/C 022/44)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: STC SpA (Forlì, Italy) (represented by: A. Marelli and G. Delucca, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially L. Di Paolo, F. Moro and L. Cappelletti, then L. Di Paolo and F. Moro, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: CPL Concordia Soc. coop. (Concordia Sulla Secchia, Italy) (represented by: A. Penta, lawyer)

Re:

First, an application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment, (i), of the Commission’s decision of 3 April 2014 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in tendering procedure JRC IPR 2013 C04 0031 OC for the construction and maintenance of a tri-generation plant with a gas turbine (OJ 2013/S 137-237146) on the site of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) in Ispra (Italy), (ii) of the Commission’s decision awarding the contract to CPL Concordia and any connected measure, prior or subsequent to that decision, including the potential decision approving the contract and, where appropriate, the contract itself, (iii) the Commission’s letter of 15 April 2014 rejecting the applicant’s request for access to the tendering documents, and second, application requesting, principally, an order for the Commission to revoke the award of the contract and to grant that contract to the applicant, and alternatively, if the harm cannot be repaired, to order the Commission to compensate the applicant for the harm suffered.

Operative part of the order

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

2. CPL Concordia Soc. coop’s forms of order sought are rejected as being manifestly inadmissible.

3. Each party shall bear its own costs relating to the present proceedings and to the proceedings for interim relief.

(1) OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 305/53

Order of the General Court of 22 June 2016 — Gain Capital UK v EUIPO — Citigroup (CITY INDEX)

(Case T-269/14) (1)

(2016/C 305/72)

Language of the case: English

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

(1) OJ C 253, 4.8.2014.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . APPLICATION FOR ANNULMENT

( TREATY, ART . 33 ).

2 . DECISIONS OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY - STATEMENT OF REASONS - REFERENCE TO OPINIONS OBTAINED

( TREATY, ARTS . 15 AND 33 ).

Summary

( CF . SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT IN CASE 3/54, PARA . 1 ):

1 . FOR AN APPLICATION BY AN UNDERTAKING OR BY AN ASSOCIATION OF UNDERTAKINGS AGAINST A GENERAL DECISION OF THE HIGH AUTHORITY TO BE ADMISSIBLE IT IS ENOUGH FOR THE APPLICANT FORMALLY TO ALLEGE THAT THERE HAS BEEN A MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING IT . THE ALLEGATION MUST INDICATE THE REASONS FOR WHICH THE APPLICANT CONSIDERS THAT THERE HAS BEEN A MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING IT . IF THE APPLICANT IS AN ASSOCIATION OF UNDERTAKINGS, IT IS SUFFICIENT FOR IT TO CLAIM THAT THERE HAS BEEN A MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING ONE OR MORE UNDERTAKINGS WHICH ARE MEMBERS OF THE ASSOCIATION .

THE TREATY DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY FURTHER CONDITION FOR AN APPLICATION TO BE ADMISSIBLE SUCH AS, FOR EXAMPLE, PROOF THAT A MISUSE OF POWERS AFFECTING THE APPLICANT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN COMMITTED, SINCE THIS LATTER QUESTION GOES TO THE SUBSTANCE .

*/ 654J0003 /*.

2 . UNDER ARTICLE 15 OF THE TREATY, THE HIGH AUTHORITY IS BOUND TO STATE IN ITS DECISIONS THE REASONS FOR WHICH IT DECIDED TO PROMULGATE THE RULES IN QUESTION AND IS BOUND TO REFER TO THE FACT THAT THE OPINIONS REQUIRED BY THE TREATY HAVE BEEN OBTAINED . ON THE OTHER HAND, THE TREATY DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT IT SHOULD MENTION, STILL LESS THAT IT SHOULD TRY TO REFUTE, THE DIVERGENT OPINIONS EXPRESSED BY THE CONSULTATIVE BODIES OR BY SOME OF THEIR MEMBERS; FAILURE TO DO SO CANNOT BE REGARDED AS PROOF, OR EVEN THE MEREST EVIDENCE, IN SUPPORT OF THE SUBMISSION OF MISUSE OF POWERS .