ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 377/13

Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2013 — Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International v Commission

(Case T-147/12) (1)

(Customs union - Imports of preserved mushrooms from China - Decision finding no justification for the remission of import duties - Article 220(2)(b) and Article 239 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Detectable error on the part of the customs authorities - Obvious negligence on the part of the importer - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Sound administration - Equal treatment)

2013/C 377/30

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International mbH & Co KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: K. Landry and G. Schwendinger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Keppenne and B.-R. Killmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 6393 final of 16 September 2011 determining that remission of import duties was not justified in a particular case

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Wünsche Handelsgesellschaft International mbH & Co KG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 52/35

Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2014 — Steiff v OHIM (Metal button in the middle section of the ear of a soft toy)

(Case T-433/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for a Community trade mark consisting of fixing a metal button in the middle section of the ear of a soft toy - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 207/2009)

2014/C 52/66

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Margarete Steiff GmbH (Giengen an der Brenz, Germany) (represented by: D. Fissl, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 July 2012 (Case R 1693/2011-1) concerning an application for registration of a sign consisting of fixing of a metal button in the middle section of the ear of a soft toy as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Margarete Steiff GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 366, 24.11.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 45/29

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2013 — Singer v OHIM — Cordia Magyarország (CORDIO)

(Case T-388/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark CORDIO - Earlier Community word mark CORDIA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2014/C 45/46

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Daniela Singer (Obertrubach, Germany) (represented by: B. Korom, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Cordia Magyarország Ingatlanforgalmazó Zrt (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: A. Nagy, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 July 2012 (Case R 1842/2011-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Cordia Magyarország Ingatlanforgalmazó Zrt and Ms Daniela Singer

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Daniela Singer to bear her own costs and to pay the costs incurred by OHIM;

3. Orders Cordia Magyarország Ingatlanforgalmazó Zrt to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 331, 27.10.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/19

Judgment of the General Court of 12 March 2014 — Tubes Radiatori v OHIM — Antrax It (Radiator)

(Case T-315/12) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a radiator for heating - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Overall impression not different - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - No scope for innovation - Obligation to state reasons))

2014/C 129/23

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Tubes Radiatori Srl (Resana, Italy) (represented by S. Verea, K. Muraro, M. Balestriero and P. Menapace, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by F. Mattina initially, then P. Bullock, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Antrax It Srl (Resana) (represented by L. Gazzola, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 April 2012 (Case R 953/2011-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Antrax It Srl and Tubes Radiatori Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decisions of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 3 April 2012 (Case R 953/2011-3);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Tubes Radiatori Srl;

4. Orders Antrax It Srl to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 78/10

Judgment of the General Court of 4 February 2014 — Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture v OHIM — Gandia Blasco (Armchair)

(Case T-357/12) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing an armchair - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

2014/C 78/19

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture, Lda (Estarreja, Portugal) (represented by: M. Oehen Mendes, 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 General Court: Gandia Blasco, SA (Valencia, Spain) (represented by: I. Sempere Massa, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 April 2012 (Case R 969/2011-3) in relation to invalidity proceedings between Gandia Blasco, SA and Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture, Lda.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sachi Premium-Outdoor Furniture Lda to pay its own costs and also the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM);

3. Orders Gandia Blasco, SA to pay its own costs.

(1) OJ C 311, 13.10.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 194/23

Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014 — Pyrox v OHIM — Köb Holzheizsysteme (PYROX)

(Case T-575/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative Community trade mark PYROX - Earlier national word marks PYROT - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 194/29

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Pyrox GmbH (Oberhausen, Germany) (represented by: T. Eigen, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Köb Holzheizsysteme GmbH (Wolfurt, Austria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 October 2012 (Joined Cases R 2187/2011-1 and R 2507/2011-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Köb Holzheizsysteme GmbH and Pyrox GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Pyrox GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 159/23

Judgment of the General Court of 4 April 2014 — Golam v OHIM — Derby Cycle Werke (FOCUS extreme)

(Case T-568/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark FOCUS extreme - Earlier national word mark FOCUS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 159/31

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sofia Golam (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Trovas, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Derby Cycle Werke GmbH (Cloppenburg, Germany) (represented by: U. Gedert, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 October 2012 (Case R 2327/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Derby Cycle Werke GmbH and Sofia Golam.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Sofia Golam to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 253/26

Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2014 — Kampol v OHIM — Colmol (Nobel)

(Case T-382/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Nobel - Earlier national word mark NOBEL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 253/37

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Kampol sp. z o.o. (Świdnica, Poland) (represented by: J. Kępiński, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Colmol-Colchões, SA (Oliveira de Azeméis, Portugal)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 June 2012 (Case R 2286/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Colmol — Colchões, SA and Kampol-K. Humiński & syn sp. z o.o.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Kampol sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 355, 17.11.2012
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 235/13

Judgment of the General Court of 4 June 2014 — Sedghi and Azizi v Council

(Case T-66/12) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Removal from the list of persons and entities concerned - Action for annulment - Interest in bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment))

2014/C 235/17

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Ali Sedghi (Tehran, Iran) and Ahmad Azizi (London, United Kingdom) (represented initially by: S. Gadhia, S. Ashley, Solicitors, D. Wyatt QC and M. Lester, Barrister, subsequently by S. Ashley, D. Wyatt, M. Lester, A. Irvine and S. Jeffrey, Solicitors, and finally by S. Ashley, D. Wyatt, M. Lester, A. Irvine and S. Millar, Solicitor)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by: M. Bishop, I. Rodios and B. Driessen, and subsequently by M. Bishop and I. Rodios, acting as Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION, principally, for annulment, with immediate effect, of Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 71), Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 319, p. 11), and Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), in so far as those acts concern the applicants, and, in the alternative, for a declaration that Article 19(1)(b) and Article 20(1)(b) of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 39), Article 16(2) of Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1), and Article 23(2) of Regulation No 267/2012 do not apply to Mr Azizi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the following, in so far as they concern Mr Ali Sedghi and Mr Ahmad Azizi: — Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran; — Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1245/2011 of 1 December 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran; — Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010;

2. Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the remainder of the action;

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 109, 14.4.2012.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 372/16

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2014 — Biscuits Poult v OHIM — Banketbakkerij Merba (Biscuit)

(Case T-494/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a broken cookie - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Articles 4, 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

2014/C 372/20

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Biscuits Poult SAS (Montauban, France) (represented by: C. Chapoullié, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Banketbakkerij Merba BV (Oosterhout, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Abello, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 August 2012 (Case R 914/2011-3) in relation to invalidity proceedings between Banketbakkerij Merba BV and Biscuits Poult SAS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1) Dismisses the action.

2) Orders Biscuits Poult SAS to bear its own expenses and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Banketbakkerij Merba BV.

(1) OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 292/39

Judgment of the General Court of 16 July 2014 — National Iranian Oil Company v Council

(Case T-578/12) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Action for annulment - Infra-State body - Standing to bring proceedings - Admissibility - Obligation to state reasons - Indication and choice of legal basis - Powers of the Council - Principle of foreseeability of European Union acts - Meaning of providing support to nuclear proliferation - Manifest error of assessment - Rights of the defence and right to effective judicial protection - Proportionality - Right to property))

2014/C 292/47

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: National Iranian Oil Company (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: J.-M. Thouvenin, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and M. Bishop, agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Aresu and M. Konstantinidis, agents)

Re:

Annulment of Council Decision 2012/635/CFSP of 15 October 2012 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 282, p. 58) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 of 15 October 2012 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2012 L 282, p. 16).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders National Iranian Oil Company to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of the Council of the European Union;

3. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 79, 16.3.2013.
Judgment of the General Court of 25 September 2014 –Spirlea v Commission

(Case T-306/12) (1)

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Third indent of Article 4(2) - Requests for information addressed by the Commission to Germany in the context of an EU Pilot procedure - Refusal of access - Obligation to carry out a concrete and individual examination - Overriding public interest - Partial access - Duty to state reasons))

(2014/C 395/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Darius Nicolai Spirlea and Mihaela Spirlea (Capezzano Pianore, Italy) (represented by: initially, V. Foerster and T. Pahl, and, subsequently, V. Foerster and E. George, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira, acting as Agent, assisted initially by A. Krämer and R. Van der Hout, and subsequently by R. Van der Hout, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the applicants: Kingdom of Denmark (represented by: initially, V. Pasternak Jørgensen and C. Thorning, and, subsequently, C. Thorning and K. Jørgensen, acting as Agents); Republic of Finland (represented by: S. Hartikainen, acting as Agent); and Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: initially, C. Meyer-Seitz, A. Falk, C. Stege, S. Johannesson, U. Persson, K. Ahlstrand-Oxhamre and H. Karlsson, and, subsequently, C. Meyer-Seitz, A. Falk, U. Persson, L. Swedenborg, C. Hagerman and E. Karlsson, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, T. Müller and D. Hadroušek, acting as Agents); and Kingdom of Spain (represented by: initially, S. Centeno Huerta, and, subsequently, J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, abogados del Estado)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 21 June 2012 refusing to allow the applicants access to two requests for information addressed by the Commission to the Federal Republic of Germany, dated 10 May and 10 October 2011, in the context of EU Pilot procedure No 2070/11/SNCO.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Arnoldo Mondadori Editore v OHIM — Grazia Equity (GRAZIA)

(Case T-490/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark GRAZIA - Earlier national figurative mark GRAZIA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Lack of similarity between the goods - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Reputation - No link between the marks at issue))

(2014/C 395/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: G. Dragotti, R. Valenti and S. Balice, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening between the General Court: Grazia Equity GmbH (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: M. Müller, lawyer)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 September 2012 (Case R 1958/2010-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA and Grazia Equity GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.
Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2014 — Royalton Overseas v OHIM — S.C. Romarose Invest (KAISERHOFF)

(Case T-556/12) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark KAISERHOFF - Earlier national word mark KAISERHOFF - Suspension of the administrative proceedings - Rules 20 and 50 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 - ‘Examination of the facts by the Office of its own motion’ - Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

(2015/C 016/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Royalton Overseas Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Năstase, 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 General Court: S.C. Romarose Invest Srl (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: R.-G. Dragomir and G.-L. Ilie, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 October 2012 (Case R 2535/2011-1) concerning opposition proceedings between S.C. Romarose Invest Srl and Royalton Overseas Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

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 4 October 2012 (Case R 2535/2011-1) concerning opposition proceedings between S.C. Romarose Invest Srl and Royalton Overseas Ltd;

2) Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Royalton Overseas, including those necessarily incurred by Royalton Overseas for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM;

3) Orders S.C. Romarose Invest to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Royalton Overseas, including those necessarily incurred by Royalton Overseas for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM.

(1) OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 439/27

Judgment of the General Court of 24 October 2014 — Grau Ferrer v OHIM — Rubio Ferrer (Bugui va)

(Case T-543/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the figurative Community mark Bugui va - Earlier national figurative mark Bugui and earlier Community figurative mark BUGUI - Relative ground for refusal - Rejection of the opposition - Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Existence of the earlier mark - Evidence presented in support of the opposition before the Board of Appeal not taken into account - Board of Appeal’s discretion - Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 15(1), second paragraph, point (a) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character))

(2014/C 439/36)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Xavier Grau Ferrer (Caldes de Montbui, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and A. Folliard-Montguiral, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Juan Cándido Rubio Ferrer (Xeraco, Spain) and Alberto Rubio Ferrer (Xeraco) (represented by: A. Cañizares Doménech, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 October 2012 (Joined Cases R 274/2011-4 and R 520/2011-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Xavier Grau Ferrer on the one hand and, on the other hand, Juan Cándido Rubio Ferrer and Alberto Rubio Ferrer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 11 October 2012 (Joined Cases R 274/2011-4 and R 520/2011-4);

2. Declares that OHIM is to bear its own costs and orders it to pay the costs incurred by Mr Xavier Grau Ferrer;

3. Declares that Juan Cándido Rubio Ferrer and Alberto Rubio Ferrer are to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.