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

Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2019 — Hércules Club de Fútbol v Commission

(Case T-766/16) (1)

(State aid - Aid granted by Spain to certain professional football clubs - Guarantee - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Advantage - Obligation to state reasons)

(2019/C 164/44)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: S. Rating and Y. Martínez Mata, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: initially A. Gavela Llopis and M.J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, subsequently by M.J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2017/365 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.36387 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) (ex 2013/CP) implemented by Spain for Valencia Club de Fútbol, SAD, Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD and Elche Club de Fútbol, SAD (OJ 2017 L 55, p. 12).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Commission Decision (EU) 2017/365 of 4 July 2016 on the State aid SA.36387 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) (ex 2013/CP) implemented by Spain for Valencia Club de Fútbol, SAD, Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD and Elche Club de Fútbol, SAD, in so far as it concerns Hércules Club de Fútbol, SAD;

2. Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Hércules Club de Fútbol;

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 6, 9.1.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 19 June 2019 — L’Oréal v EUIPO — Guinot (MASTER SMOKY)

(Case T-179/16 RENV) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark MASTER SMOKY - Earlier national figurative mark MASTERS COLORS PARIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2019/C 305/43)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: L’Oréal (Paris, France) (represented by: T. de Haan and P. Péters, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Guinot (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Sion, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 February 2016 (Case R 2905/2014-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Guinot and L’Oréal.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders L’Oréal to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 11 July 2019 — BP v FRA

(Case T-888/16) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the contract staff - FRA - Fixed-term contract - Decision not to renew - New decision adopted following an annulment by the General Court - Rights of the defence - Principle of sound administration - Obligation to state reasons - Liability)

(2019/C 295/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BP (represented by: E. Lazar, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (represented by: M. O’Flaherty, Agent, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Action under Article 270 TFEU, seeking (i) annulment of the FRA decision of 4 April 2016 not to renew the applicant’s contract as a member of the contract staff, adopted as a result of the implementation of the judgment of 3 June 2015, BP v FRA, (T-658/13 P, EU:T:2015:356); and (ii) compensation for the damage which the applicant allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders BP to bear her own costs and pay those incurred by the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA).

(1) OJ C 53, 20.2.2017.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 25 June 2020 — MU v Parliament

(Case T-40/16) (1)

(Action for annulment - Article 263 TFEU - Internal Rules governing Traineeships and Study Visits in the Secretariat of the Parliament - Trainee with disabilities - Additional disability allowance - Refusal - Conditions for grant of additional amount prescribed for trainees with disabilities - Error in law)

(2020/C 271/41)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: MU (represented by: A. Bruno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: J. Van Pottelberge, J. Steele and E. Paladini, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 11 December 2015 refusing the additional payment prescribed for trainees with disabilities by Article 24(9) of the Internal Rules governing Traineeships and Study Visits in the Secretariat of the Parliament.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Parliament of 11 December 2015 refusing the additional payment for trainees with disabilities provided for by Article 24(9) of the Internal Rules governing Traineeships and Study Visits in the Secretariat of the Parliament to MU.

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

3. Orders the Parliament to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 312 of 16.9.2019.
Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2019 — Feral v Committee of the Regions

(Case T-592/16) (1)

(Civil Service - Reform of the Staff Regulations and of the CEOS that entered into force on 1 January 2014 - Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 - Solidarity levy applicable from 1 January 2014 - Suspension of application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014)

(2020/C 36/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Pierre-Alexis Feral (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis, R. Metz and D. Verbeke, lawyers)

Defendant: Committee of the Regions (represented by: J. C. Cañoto Argüelles and S. Bachotet, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Taneva and M. Ecker, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision fixing the applicant’s remuneration for January 2014, as given specific expression in the salary slip for that month sent to him on 13 January 2014, which is the first salary slip to apply, with regard to the applicant, Article 65(4) and Article 66a of the Staff Regulations stemming from Article 1(44) and (46) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 (OJ 2013 L 287, p.15) providing, respectively, for the suspension of the application of the method for updating remuneration for 2013 and 2014 and the introduction of a solidarity levy from 1 January 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Pierre-Alexis Feral to pay the costs;

3. Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 7, 12.1.2015 (case initially registered before the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union under number F-123/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1 September 2016).
Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2022 — Mylan IRE Healthcare v Commission

(Case T-303/16) (1)

(Medicinal products for human use - Orphan medicinal products - Marketing authorisations for the medicinal products Tobramycin VVB and associated names - Derogation from the market exclusivity of Tobi Podhaler, containing the active substance tobramycin - Article 8(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 - Concept of ‘significant benefit’ - Concept of ‘clinical superiority’ - Article 3(2) and (3)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 847/2000 - Duty of care - Manifest error of assessment)

(2022/C 119/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mylan IRE Healthcare Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: I. Vernimme, M. Campolini and D. Gillet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Mifsud-Bonnici and A. Sipos, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: UAB VVB (Kaunas, Lithuania) (represented by: E. Rivas Alba, V. Horcajuelo Rivera and M. Martens, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Decision C(2016) 2083 final of 4 April 2016 concerning, in the framework of Article 29 of Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the marketing authorisations for ‘Tobramycin VVB and associated names’, medicinal products for human use which contain the active substance ‘tobramycin’.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mylan IRE Healthcare Ltd to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission and by UAB VVB, including those relating to procedure for the replacement of a party.

(1) OJ C 296, 16.8.2016.
Official Journal of the European Union

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — BZ v ECB

(Case T-554/16) (1)

(Public service - ECB staff - Application for recognition of the occupational origin of a disease - Articles 6.3.11 to 6.3.13 of the ECB Staff Rules - Irregularity of the procedure - No inquiry report - Non-contractual liability)

(2021/C 320/38)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: BZ (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: E. Carlini and F. Malfrère, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the ECB of 23 July 2014 which closed the procedure for recognition of the occupational origin of the applicant’s disease, and second, compensation for the material and non-material harm that the applicant allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 23 July 2014 which closed the procedure for recognition of the occupational origin of BZ’s disease;

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders the ECB to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 279, 24.8.2015 (case initially registered at the European Union Civil Service Tribunal as Case F-79/15 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 392/25

Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2017 — Forest Pharma v EUIPO — Ipsen Pharma (COLINEB)

(Case T-36/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark COLINEB - Earlier national figurative mark Colina - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Extent of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2017/C 392/31)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Forest Pharma BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: T. Holman, Solicitor)

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: Ipsen Pharma SAS (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: E. Baud, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 October 2016 (Case R 500/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ipsen Pharma and Forest Pharma.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Forest Pharma BV to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

3. Orders Ipsen Pharma SAS to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 70, 6.3.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 152/33

Judgment of the General Court of 15 March 2018 — SSP Europe v EUIPO (SECURE DATA SPACE)

(Case T-205/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark SECURE DATA SPACE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 152/40)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: SSP Europe GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: B. Bittner, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Tóhatí and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 January 2017 (Case R 2467/2015-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign SECURE DATA SPACE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders SSP Europe GmbH to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 161, 22.5.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 104/39

Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2018 — Cantina e oleificio sociale di San Marzano v EUIPO — Miguel Torres (SANTORO)

(Case T-102/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - EU figurative mark SANTORO - Earlier EU word mark SANGRE DE TORO - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 104/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Cantina e oleificio sociale di San Marzano (San Marzano di San Giuseppe, Italy) (represented initially by F. Jacobacci and E. Truffo, and subsequently by I. Carli, lawyers)

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: Miguel Torres, SA (Vilafranca del Penedés, Spain) (represented by: J. Güell Serra, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 December 2016 (Case R 2018/2015-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Miguel Torres and Cantina e oleificio sociale di San Marzano.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Cantina e oleificio sociale di San Marzano to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.
Case T-429/17: Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Laboratoires Majorelle v EUIPO — Jardin Majorelle (LABORATOIRES MAJORELLE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark LABORATOIRES MAJORELLE — Earlier EU word mark MAJORELLE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Earlier trade marks — Division of the trade mark application — Article 44(6) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 50(6) of Regulation 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 3 May 2018 — Laboratoires Majorelle v EUIPO — Jardin Majorelle (LABORATOIRES MAJORELLE)

(Case T-429/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark LABORATOIRES MAJORELLE — Earlier EU word mark MAJORELLE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Earlier trade marks — Division of the trade mark application — Article 44(6) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 50(6) of Regulation 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Laboratoires Majorelle (Paris, France) (represented by: G. Odinot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Jardin Majorelle (Marrakech, Morocco)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 May 2017 (Case R 1238/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Jardin Majorelle and Laboratoires Majorelle.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Laboratoires Majorelle to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 309, 18.9.2017.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 190/27

Judgment of the General Court of 17 April 2018 — Bielawski v EUIPO (HOUSE OF CARS)

(Case T-364/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark HOUSE OF CARS - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Legitimate expectations - Legal certainty))

(2018/C 190/48)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Marcin Bielawski (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2017 (Case R 2047/2016-5), concerning an application for registration of the word sign HOUSE OF CARS as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Marcin Bielawski to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.
Case T-314/17: Judgment of the General Court of 31 May 2018 — Nosio v EUIPO (MEZZA) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark MEZZA — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Restriction of goods — Article 43(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 49(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Right to be heard — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 31 May 2018 — Nosio v EUIPO (MEZZA)

(Case T-314/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark MEZZA — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Restriction of goods — Article 43(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 49(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Obligation to state reasons — Right to be heard — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Nosio SpA (Mezzocorona, Italy) (represented by: A. Perani and J. Graffer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 March 2017 (Case R 1518/2016-5) concerning an application for registration of the word sign MEZZA as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Nosio SpA to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 231, 17.7.2017.
Case T-419/17: Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2018 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL#3) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark VSL#3 — Trade mark having become a common name in the trade for a product or service for which it is registered — Mark liable to mislead the public — Article 51(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2018 — Mendes v EUIPO — Actial Farmaceutica (VSL#3)

(Case T-419/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark VSL#3 — Trade mark having become a common name in the trade for a product or service for which it is registered — Mark liable to mislead the public — Article 51(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: Mendes SA (Lugano, Switzerland) (represented by: G. Carpineti, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the Court: Actial Farmaceutica Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: S. Giudici, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 May 2017 (Case R 1306/2016-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Mendes and Actial Farmaceutica.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mendes SA to bear the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.
Case T-362/17: Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2018 — NCL v EUIPO (FEEL FREE) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark FEEL FREE — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2018 — NCL v EUIPO (FEEL FREE)

(Case T-362/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark FEEL FREE — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))’

Parties

Applicant: NCL Corporation Ltd (Miami, Florida, United States) (represented by: J. Bühling and D. Graetsch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: W. Schramek, A. Söder and D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 March 2017 (Case R 2094/2016-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign FEEL FREE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders NCL Corporation Ltd to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.
Case T-72/17: Judgment of the General Court of 7 June 2018 — Schmid v EUIPO — Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Steirisches Kürbiskernöl) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark Steirisches Kürbiskernöl — Protected geographical indication — Article 15, Article 51(1)(a) and Article 55(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18, Article 58(1)(a) and Article 62(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the mark — Use as a trade mark)

Judgment of the General Court of 7 June 2018 — Schmid v EUIPO — Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Steirisches Kürbiskernöl)

(Case T-72/17) ( 1 )

‛(EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark Steirisches Kürbiskernöl — Protected geographical indication — Article 15, Article 51(1)(a) and Article 55(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18, Article 58(1)(a) and Article 62(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the mark — Use as a trade mark)’

Parties

Applicant: Gabriele Schmid (Halbenrain, Austria) (represented by: B. Kuchar, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark (Graz, Austria) (represented by: I. Hödl and S. Schoeller, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 December 2016 (Case R 1768/2015-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Ms Schmid and Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 December 2016 (Case R 1768/2015-4);

2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and also to pay the costs incurred by Ms Gabriele Schmid;

4. Orders Landeskammer für Land- und Forstwirtschaft in Steiermark to bear its own costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 104, 3.4.2017.