ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords



Keywords

Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Suspension of operation of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding to immediate recovery of a fine imposed — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — Impossible to obtain a bank guarantee — Extent of the burden of proof (Art. 278 TFEU) (see paras 33-36, 41, 53-56)

2. Applications for interim measures — Procedure — Whether appropriate to hear the parties — Whether appropriate to admit additional observations and documents after the ending of the written or oral procedure — Discretion of the judge hearing the application for interim relief (Art. 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 39, first para., and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 105) (see paras 49-51)

3. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Suspension of operation of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding to immediate recovery of a fine imposed — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — Taking account of the situation of the group to which the undertaking belongs and of its shareholders — Necessity of providing, at the time of making the application, information concerning the financial capacity of the undertaking’s shareholders (Art. 278 TFEU) (see paras 67-69)

4. Appeals — Grounds — Plea raised against a ground of the judgment not necessary in order for the operative part to be founded — Plea ineffective (see para. 72)
Keywords



Keywords

Actions for annulment

—

Actionable measures

—

Meaning

—

Measures producing binding legal effects

—

Letter from the Commission setting out its position as to the steps to be taken in response to the opinion of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the European Medicines Agency

—

Not included (Art. 263 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 726/2004, Art. 10(2)) (see paras 51-58, 60, 61

)
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 May 2012 — LAN Airlines v OHIM

(Case C-198/11 P)

‛Appeal — Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Community word mark LÍNEAS AÉREAS DEL MEDITERRÁNEO LAM — Application for registration — Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier Community word and figurative marks LAN — Rejection of the opposition — No likelihood of confusion — Appeal manifestly inadmissible’

Appeals — Grounds — Mistaken assessment of the facts — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the facts put before the Court of First Instance — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 33)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 February 2011 in Case T-194/09 Lan Airlines v OHIM — Air Nostrum, Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo, by which that court dismissed an appeal brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 February 2009 (Case R 107/2008/4), relating to opposition proceedings between Lan Airlines, SA and Air Nostrum, Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo, SA.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. LAN Airlines SA is ordered to pay the costs.

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 May 2012 — LAN Airlines v OHIM

(Case C-198/11 P)

‛Appeal — Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Community word mark LÍNEAS AÉREAS DEL MEDITERRÁNEO LAM — Application for registration — Opposition by the proprietor of the earlier Community word and figurative marks LAN — Rejection of the opposition — No likelihood of confusion — Appeal manifestly inadmissible’

Appeals — Grounds — Mistaken assessment of the facts — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of Justice of the assessment of the facts put before the Court of First Instance — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 33)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 February 2011 in Case T-194/09 Lan Airlines v OHIM — Air Nostrum, Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo, by which that court dismissed an appeal brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 February 2009 (Case R 107/2008/4), relating to opposition proceedings between Lan Airlines, SA and Air Nostrum, Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo, SA.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.
Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Judicial proceedings

—

Intervention

—

Conditions of admissibility

—

Interest in the result of the case

—

Meaning

—

Need for a direct and existing interest

—

Dispute concerning the lawfulness of a Commission decision finding there to be a cartel and imposing a fine

—

Lack of direct interest of the customers of undertakings participating in the cartel

—

Ability of a customer to seek compensation for harm caused by the cartel

—

Customer who has made an application for access to the documents of the administrative procedure concerning the cartel

—

Lack of relevance (Art. 101 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 40, second para.; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 1049/2001) (see paras 10, 12-16, 23-25

)

Subject of the case

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 October 2011 in Case T-38/11 Cathay Pacific Airways v Commission , by which the General Court rejected the application for leave to intervene made by Schenker AG — Interest in the result of the case — Dispute relating to an application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, of Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on air transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight).

Operative part

Operative part:

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Schenker AG is ordered to pay the costs.
Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 July 2012 — Audi and Volkswagen v OHIM

(Case C-467/11 P)

‛Appeal — Community trade mark — Appeal which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate’

Appeals — Interest in bringing proceedings — Condition — Appeal capable of procuring an advantage for the party bringing it (see para. 11)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 July 2011 in Case T-318/09 Audi and Volkswagen v OHMI (TDI), by which the General Court dismissed the action for annulment brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 May 2009 (Case R 226/2007-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign TDI as a Community trade mark for the goods in Class 12 (Vehicles and constructive parts thereof) — Infringement of Articles 7(1)(c) and 7(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Distinctive character of the word sign TDI.

Operative part

1. There is no need to adjudicate on the appeal.

2. Audi AG and Volkswagen AG are ordered to pay the costs.

Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 July 2012 — Audi and Volkswagen v OHIM

(Case C-467/11 P)

‛Appeal — Community trade mark — Appeal which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate’

Appeals — Interest in bringing proceedings — Condition — Appeal capable of procuring an advantage for the party bringing it (see para. 11)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 July 2011 in Case T-318/09 Audi and Volkswagen v OHMI (TDI), by which the General Court dismissed the action for annulment brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 May 2009 (Case R 226/2007-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign TDI as a Community trade mark for the goods in Class 12 (Vehicles and constructive parts thereof) — Infringement of Articles 7(1)(c) and 7(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Distinctive character of the word sign TDI.

Operative part

1. There is no need to adjudicate on the appeal.
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 June 2011 – Verein Deutsche Sprache v Council

(Case C-93/11 P)

Appeal – Contents of the internet site of the Presidency of the Council – Council’s failure to guarantee that the entire contents of the site exist in the German language – Action for failure to act – Position taken – Action for annulment – Actionable measures – Effective judicial protection – Appeal clearly unfounded

1. Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Statement of the forms of order sought – Implicit claims seeking a declaration of an institution’s failure to act (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 44(1)(d)) (see paras 18-21)

2. Actions for annulment – Actionable measures – Definition – Measures producing binding legal effects – Presentation of the internet sites of the Presidencies of the Council – Letter sent by an institution – Not included (Art. 263, fourth para., TFEU) (see paras 25-29)

3. Union law – Principles – Right to effective judicial protection – Inadmissibility of an action for annulment of measures that do not produce binding legal effects – Whether possible for persons to challenge such measures by means of an action for the Union’s non-contractual liability (Arts 268 TFEU and 340, second para., TFEU) (see paras 30-31)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 17 December 2010 in Case T‑245/10 Verein Deutsche Sprache v Council by which that court dismissed as manifestly inadmissible the appellant’s action for a declaration that the Council had infringed European Union law by, in particular, failing to ensure that the entire contents of the Council Presidency’s website be available in German – Failure to take account of the nature and purpose of the action – No legal scrutiny of the Council’s position – Breach of the obligation to safeguard the unity and consistency of Union law.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.
Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission

(Case C-208/11 P-DEP)

‛Taxation of costs’

1. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Expenses necessarily incurred by the parties — Fees paid by an institution to its lawyer — Whether included (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 19, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 144(b)) (see paras 13-15)

2. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 144(b)) (see paras 17, 18)

3. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration — Conduct of the parties — Not relevant (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 144 and 145(1)) (see para. 25)

4. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration — Fees payable by the parties to their own lawyers — Determination of the fees which may be recovered from the party ordered to pay the costs (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 144(b) and 145) (see para. 27)

Re:

Article 74 of the Rules of Procedure — Application for taxation of costs following the order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 February 2012 in Case C-208/11 P, Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission.

Operative part

The total costs to be reimbursed by Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV to the European Commission in Case C-208/11 P are fixed at EUR 3 500.

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 May 2013 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission

(Case C-208/11 P-DEP)

‛Taxation of costs’

1. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Expenses necessarily incurred by the parties — Fees paid by an institution to its lawyer — Whether included (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 19, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 144(b)) (see paras 13-15)

2. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 144(b)) (see paras 17, 18)

3. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration — Conduct of the parties — Not relevant (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 144 and 145(1)) (see para. 25)

4. Judicial proceedings — Costs — Taxation — Recoverable costs — Elements to be taken into consideration — Fees payable by the parties to their own lawyers — Determination of the fees which may be recovered from the party ordered to pay the costs (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 144(b) and 145) (see para. 27)

Re:

Article 74 of the Rules of Procedure — Application for taxation of costs following the order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 February 2012 in Case C-208/11 P, Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission.

Operative part

The total costs to be reimbursed by Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV to the European Commission in Case C-208/11 P are fixed at EUR 3 500.
Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 December 2011 – INNO v Unie van Zelfstandige Ondernemers and Others

(Case C-126/11)

First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – National legislation prohibiting announcements of price reductions and those suggestive of such reductions

Approximation of laws – Unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices – Directive 2005/29 – National legislation laying down a general prohibition of announcements of price reductions and of announcements suggesting such a reduction during the period preceding the sales – Not permissible – Condition (European Parliament and Council Directive 2005/29) (see para. 32, operative part)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Hof van Cassatie van België – Interpretation of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22).

Operative part

Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC and Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) must be interpreted as precluding a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which lays down a general prohibition of announcements of price reductions or announcements suggesting such reductions during the period preceding sales, in so far as that provision pursues objectives relating to consumer protection.
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 February 2012 — Novartis v Actavis UK

(Case C‑442/11)

The first subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Medicinal products for human use — Supplementary protection certificate — Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 — Articles 4 and 5 — Sole active ingredient for which such a certificate is granted — Scope of protection — Medicinal product containing more than one active ingredient, including the active ingredient which is the subject of a certificate

Approximation of laws — Uniform legislation — Industrial and commercial property — Patent right — Supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 469/2009, Arts 4 and 5) (see para. 23, operative part)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) — Interpretation of Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (OJ 2009 L 152, p. 1) — Scope of the certificate — Protection only of medicinal products containing the protected active ingredient alone or protection also of medicinal products containing the protected active ingredient in combination with another active ingredient.

Operative part

Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 concerning the supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products must be interpreted as meaning that, where a ‘product’ consisting of an active ingredient was protected by a basic patent and the holder of that patent was able to rely on the protection conferred by that patent for that ‘product’ in order to oppose the marketing of a medicinal product containing that active ingredient in combination with one or more other active ingredients, a supplementary protection certificate granted for that ‘product’ enables its holder, after the basic patent has expired, to oppose the marketing by a third party of a medicinal product containing that product for a use of the ‘product’, as a medicinal product, which was authorised before that certificate expired.
Appeal lodged against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 July 2011 in Case T‑235/10

Timehouse

v

OHIM (Shape of a watch with scalloped edges)

, by which that court dismissed an action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 March 2010 (Case R 0942/2009‑1) concerning an application for registration as a Community trade mark of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of a watch — Lack of distinctiveness.
Order of the President of the Court of 18 April 2012 —

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Council



(Case C‑656/11 R)

Application for interim measures — Council decision — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Application for interim measures — Decision 2011/863/EU — Urgency

1. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Interim measures — Conditions for granting — Prima facie case — Urgency — Serious and irreparable damage — Cumulative nature –Weighing up of all the interests involved (Arts 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU) (see paras 27, 28)

2. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Interim measures — Conditions for granting — Urgency — Serious and irreparable damage — Burden of proof — Whether damage is actually caused dependent on uncertain, future events — Lack of urgency (Arts 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU) (see paras 31-40)

3. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Interim measures — Conditions for granting — Urgency — Serious and irreparable damage — Financial loss — Damage that can be made good by the grant of compensation in the action in the main proceedings — Not irreparable (Arts 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU) (see paras 41-46)

Re:

Application for suspension of the operation of Council Decision 2011/863/EU of 16 December 2011 on the position to be taken by the European Union in the Joint Committee established under the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons as regards the replacement of Annex II to that Agreement on the coordination of social security schemes (OJ 2011 L 341, p. 1), and for the grant of interim measures to similar effect.

Operative part

1. The application for interim relief is dismissed.
Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 21 September 2011 in Case T-201/09

Rügen Fisch

v

OHIM

, by which the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2009 (Case R 230/2007-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Rügen Fisch AG and Schwaaner Fischwaren GmbH — Infringment of Articles 7(1)(c) and 51(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Descriptive character of the word sign SCOMBER MIX.
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 October 2012 — Vivaio dei Molini Azienda Agricola Porro Savoldi



(Case C-502/11)

Public works contracts – Directive 93/37/EEC – Article 6 – Principles of equal treatment and openness – Admissibility of rules reserving the right to participate in public tendering procedures to companies engaged in a commercial activity and excluding civil partnerships (società semplici) – Institutional and statutory objectives – Agricultural undertakings

1. Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public works contracts – Directive 93/37 – Purpose (Council Directive 93/37) (see para. 31)

2. Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public works contracts – Tenderers – National legislation excluding candidates of a certain legal form – Not permissible – Contactor – Notion – Classification not dependent on direct performance with the contractor’s own resources, on its legal status and its systematic presence on the market (Council Directive 93/37) (see paras 32-35)

3. Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public works contracts – Directive 93/37 – Exclusion from participation in a contract – Limited nature of the list of causes set out in the first paragraph of Article 24 of the Directive – Power of the Member Stes to provide for other means of exclusion – Conditions (Council Directive 93/37, Art. 24, first para.) (see para 37-42)

4. Approximation of laws – Procedures for the award of public works contracts – Directive 93/37 – Exclusion from participation in a contract – National legislation excluding individual agricultural undertakings engaged in commercial activities in the form of civil partnerships – Not permissible (Council Directive 93/37, Art. 6) (see paras 47-51)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consiglio di Stato – Interpretation of Article 6 of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54) – Principle of non-discrimination – National legislation reserving the right to participate in public tendering procedures to companies engaged in a commercial activity and excluding agricultural undertakings in the form of civil partnerships (società semplici).

Operative part

European Union law, in particular Article 6 of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, as amended by Commission Directive 2001/78/EC of 13 September 2001, precludes national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which prohibits an undertaking such as a civil partnership having the status of ‘contractor’ within the meaning of Directive 93/37 from participating in public procurement procedures solely on the ground of its legal form.