do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-220/09: Action brought on 3 June 2009 — ERGO Versicherungsgruppe v OHIM — Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle (ERGO)
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), industrial research, research and development, trade-mark law








C_2009180EN.01006001.xml










1.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 180/60





Action brought on 3 June 2009 — ERGO Versicherungsgruppe v OHIM — Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle (ERGO)
(Case T-220/09)
2009/C 180/110
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: ERGO Versicherungsgruppe (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A Renck, T. Dolde and J. Pause, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle SAS (Chenôve, France)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 March 2009 in Case No R 515/2008-4;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘ERGO’ for goods and services in Classes 3 and 5 (registration application No 3 292 638)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle SAS

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the word mark ‘URGO’ for goods in Classes 3 and 5 (Community trade mark No 989 863)

Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 207/2009 (1)) on the grounds that there was no likelihood of confusion between the two opposing marks.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1)
Case T-179/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 3 June 2009 — Commission v Burie Onderzoek en advies (Arbitration clause — Contracts concluded under the RACE II programme and a specific programme in the field of telematic applications of common interest — Repayment of part of the advances paid — Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance — Partial inadmissibility — Principle of sound administration — Counterclaim)
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, appeal to the Court (EU), audit, contract, information technology, payment, research and development, telematics








C_2009167EN.01000902.xml










18.7.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 167/9





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 3 June 2009 — Commission v Burie Onderzoek en advies
(Case T-179/06) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Contracts concluded under the RACE II programme and a specific programme in the field of telematic applications of common interest - Repayment of part of the advances paid - Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance - Partial inadmissibility - Principle of sound administration - Counterclaim)
2009/C 167/19
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented initially by A. Weimar and L. Escobar Guerrero, and subsequently by W. Roels, Agents, assisted by W. Rupert)

Defendant: Burie Onderzoek en Advies BV (Nijeholtpade, Netherlands) (represented by: I. van den Berge and A. Appelman, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to an arbitration clause within the meaning of Article 238 EC seeking an order that Burie Onderzoek en Advies BV repay part of the advances paid by the European Community, together with default interest, in implementation of two financing contracts in the field of advanced communications technologies in Europe and of telematic applications.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses as inadmissible the action concerning the repayment of advances paid by the Commission under the Barbara (Broad Range of Community Based Telematics Applications in Rural Areas) contract with reference number ‘Project R 2022’ in so far as that action is directed against Burie Onderzoek en Advies BV, on the ground that it is clear that the Court of First Instance has no jurisdiction to take cognisance of the action;










2.


Orders Burie Onderzoek en Advies, under the Telepromise (Telematics to Provide for Missing Services) contract with reference number ‘Project UR 1028’, to pay the Commission the principal sum of EUR 109 535,62 plus default interest at the applicable statutory rate in the Netherlands from 31 August 2001 until full payment of the debt;










3.


Dismisses the counterclaim of Burie Onderzoek en Advies;










4.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 224, 16.9.2006.
Case C-576/08: Order of the President of the Court of 3 June 2009 — People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v Council of the European Union, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Commission of the European Communities, Kingdom of the Netherlands
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Iran, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom, ordinance








C_2009205EN.01003002.xml










29.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 205/30





Order of the President of the Court of 3 June 2009 — People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran v Council of the European Union, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Commission of the European Communities, Kingdom of the Netherlands
(Case C-576/08) (1)

2009/C 205/53

Language of the case: English

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


(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2008.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2009123EN.01001201.xml










3.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 123/12





Euro exchange rates (1)

2 June 2009
2009/C 123/06

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,4238




JPY


Japanese yen


136,09




DKK


Danish krone


7,4456




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86520




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6375




CHF


Swiss franc


1,5137




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,7725




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,830




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


281,70




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7095




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4877




RON


Romanian leu


4,1860




TRY


Turkish lira


2,1779




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7443




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,5433




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


11,0373




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,1767




SGD


Singapore dollar


2,0480




KRW


South Korean won


1 758,24




ZAR


South African rand


11,4810




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,7261




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3383




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 609,18




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9676




PHP


Philippine peso


67,291




RUB


Russian rouble


43,5755




THB


Thai baht


48,580




BRL


Brazilian real


2,7677




MXN


Mexican peso


18,8725




INR


Indian rupee


66,9420






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 456/2009 of 3 June 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, common agricultural policy, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit








L_2009138EN.01000101.xml










4.6.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 138/1








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 456/2009
of 3 June 2009
         
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables


THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),


Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 June 2009.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 3 June 2009.


For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY
            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development






(1)  
            OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.




ANNEX
Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables







(EUR/100 kg)




CN code


Third country code (1)



Standard import value




0702 00 00 


IL 


69,6 




MA 


125,3 




TR 


57,2 




ZZ 


84,0 




0707 00 05 


MK 


27,4 




TR 


134,5 




ZZ 


81,0 




0709 90 70 


TR 


117,0 




ZZ 


117,0 




0805 50 10 


AR 


51,1 




TR 


57,8 




ZA 


57,9 




ZZ 


55,6 




0808 10 80 


AR 


80,0 




BR 


72,8 




CL 


71,8 




CN 


90,3 




NZ 


105,8 




US 


119,3 




UY 


71,7 




ZA 


82,2 




ZZ 


86,7 




0809 10 00 


TR 


227,5 




ZZ 


227,5 






(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
            ZZ
            ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.
Case C–394/08 P: Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 June 2009 — Zipcar, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Community trade mark — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Word mark ZIPCAR — Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark CICAR)
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Canary Islands, EU Member State, EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, General Court (EU), appeal, infringement of EU law, trade-mark law








C_2009220EN.01001701.xml










12.9.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 220/17





Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 June 2009 — Zipcar, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C–394/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Word mark ZIPCAR - Opposition by the proprietor of the national word mark CICAR)
2009/C 220/29
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Zipcar, Inc. (represented by: M. Elmslie, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) of 25 June 2008 in Case T-36/07 Zipcar v OHIM dismissing an action for annulment brought by the applicant for registration of the word mark ‘ZIPCAR’ for goods in Classes 9, 39 and 42 against decision R 122/2006-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 30 November 2006 rejecting the action against the decision of the Opposition Division partially refusing registration of that mark in opposition proceedings brought by the holder of the national word mark ‘CICAR’ for services in Class 39

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Zipcar Inc. is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 285, 8.11.2008.
Case T-221/09: Action brought on 3 June 2009 — ERGO Versicherungsgruppe v OHIM — Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle (ERGO Group)
Date: 2009-06-03
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), industrial research, research and development, trade-mark law








C_2009180EN.01006002.xml










1.8.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 180/60





Action brought on 3 June 2009 — ERGO Versicherungsgruppe v OHIM — Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle (ERGO Group)
(Case T-221/09)
2009/C 180/111
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: ERGO Versicherungsgruppe AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A. Renck, T.Dolde and J. Pause, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle SAS (Chenôve, France)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 20 March 2009 in Case R 520/2008-4; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘ERGO’ for goods and services in Classes 3 and 5 (Application No 3 296 449)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Société de Développement et de Recherche Industrielle SAS

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘URGO’ (Community trade mark No 989 863) for goods an services in Classes 3 and 5

Decision of the Opposition Division: Partial acceptance of the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: The contested decision infringes Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1)) in as much as there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).