do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-378/09: Action brought on 30 September 2009 — SPAR v OHIM — SPA Group Europe (SPA GROUP)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), education, provision of services, pulp and paper industry, trade-mark law








C_2009282EN.01005802.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/58





Action brought on 30 September 2009 — SPAR v OHIM — SPA Group Europe (SPA GROUP)
(Case T-378/09)
2009/C 282/109
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: SPAR Handelsgesellschaft mbH (Schenefeld) (represented by: R. Kaase and J.-C. Plate, 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: SPA Group Europe Ltd & Co. KG (Nürnberg, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 16 July 2009 in case R 123/2008-1 for being incompatible with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1);










—


Order OHIM to pay the costs incurred both in these proceedings and in the opposition and appeal proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: SPA Group Europe Ltd & Co. KG

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘SPA GROUP’ for goods and services in Classes 16, 35, 41 and 44 (Application No 4 038 171)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: the applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the German figurative mark ‘SPAR’ for goods and services in Classes 1 to 36 and 38 to 41 (No 30 108 039.9) and the figurative German mark ‘SPAR’ for services in Classes 35, 36 and 39 (No 30 404 087.8)

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Council Regulation 40/94, since there is a likelihood of confusion between the two marks at issue


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 914/2009 of 30 September 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, grape, import price, pip fruit








L_2009258EN.01000401.xml










1.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 258/4








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 914/2009
of 30 September 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 1 October 2009.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 30 September 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 


MK 


27,4 




ZZ 


27,4 




0707 00 05 


TR 


114,4 




ZZ 


114,4 




0709 90 70 


TR 


110,1 




ZZ 


110,1 




0805 50 10 


AR 


56,9 




CL 


103,4 




TR 


64,9 




UY 


88,0 




ZA 


75,8 




ZZ 


77,8 




0806 10 10 


EG 


109,7 




TR 


98,0 




US 


190,3 




ZZ 


132,7 




0808 10 80 


BR 


83,8 




CL 


85,7 




NZ 


75,7 




US 


83,8 




ZA 


73,5 




ZZ 


80,5 




0808 20 50 


AR 


81,8 




CN 


48,7 




TR 


101,8 




US 


161,5 




ZA 


70,1 




ZZ 


92,8 






(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 T-175/05: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Akzo Nobel and Others v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for monochloroacetic acid — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Action for annulment — Admissibility — Market sharing and price fixing — Attributability of the infringement — Fines — Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based — Gravity and duration of the infringement — Deterrent effect)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), chemical industry, control of restrictive practices, fine, liability, parent company, restriction on competition, restrictive trade practice, subsidiary








C_2009282EN.01003602.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/36





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Akzo Nobel and Others v Commission
(Case T-175/05) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for monochloroacetic acid - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Market sharing and price fixing - Attributability of the infringement - Fines - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Deterrent effect)
2009/C 282/67
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Akzo Nobel NV (Arnhem, Netherlands); Akzo Nobel Nederland BV (Arnhem); Akzo Nobel AB (Stockholm, Sweden); Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV (Amersfoort, Netherlands); Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV (Amersfoort); Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB (Skoghall, Sweden); and Eka Chemicals AB (Bohus, Sweden) (represented initially by C. Swaak and A. Käyhkö, and subsequently by C. Swaak and M. van der Woude, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented initially by P. Hellström and F. Amato, and subsequently by A. Bouquet and X. Lewis, Agents)

Re:

Application, principally, for annulment of Commission Decision C(2004) 4876 final of 19 January 2005 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/E-1/37.773 — MCAA) and, in the alternative, reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Akzo Nobel NV, Akzo Nobel Nederland BV, Akzo Nobel AB, Akzo Nobel Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Functional Chemicals BV, Akzo Nobel Base Chemicals AB and Eka Chemicals AB to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 171, 9.7.2005.
Case T-191/08: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — JOOP! v OHIM (Representation of an exclamation mark in a rectangle) (Community trade mark — Application for registration of a figurative Community trade mark representing an exclamation mark in a rectangle — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — No distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), clothing industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, trade-mark law








C_2009282EN.01004501.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/45





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — JOOP! v OHIM (Representation of an exclamation mark in a rectangle)
(Case T-191/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for registration of a figurative Community trade mark representing an exclamation mark in a rectangle - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2009/C 282/85
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: JOOP! GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: H. Schmidt-Hollburg, W. Möllering, A. Löhde, H. Leo, A. Witte, T. Frank, A. Theil, H-P. Rühland, B. Willers and T. Rein, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 March 2008 (Case R 1822/2007-1) relating to an application for registration of a figurative sign as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JOOP! GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.
Case T-166/08: Order of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Ivanov v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Local administrative and technical staff — Rejection of application — Jurisdiction of the Tribunal — Annulment action time-barred — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals — Act of the European Ombudsman — Action partially inadmissible and partially manifestly devoid of any legal basis)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), damages, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, recruitment








C_2009282EN.01004802.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/48





Order of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Ivanov v Commission
(Case T-166/08) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Local administrative and technical staff - Rejection of application - Jurisdiction of the Tribunal - Annulment action time-barred - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Act of the European Ombudsman - Action partially inadmissible and partially manifestly devoid of any legal basis)
2009/C 282/92
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Vladimir Ivanov (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Curall and B. Eggers, Agents)

Re:

The applicant claims to have suffered as a result of the Commission's decision refusing to recruit him as a

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Mr Vladimir Ivanov is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5502 — Merck/Schering-Plough) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: animal health, economic concentration, exchange of information, health care, merger control, pharmaceutical industry, public health, research








C_2009235EN.01002701.xml










30.9.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/27





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5502 — Merck/Schering-Plough)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 235/06






1.


On 18 September 2009 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Merck & Co. Inc. (‘Merck’, US) enter into a full merger within the meaning of Article 3(1)(a) of the Council Regulation with the undertaking Schering-Plough Corporation (‘Schering-Plough’, US) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for undertaking Merck: global research-driven pharmaceutical company that discovers, develops, manufactures and markets a broad range of innovative human health products,










—


for undertaking Schering-Plough: global science-based healthcare company active in three business segments: human health prescription pharmaceuticals, animal health and over-the-counter consumer healthcare.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.










4.


The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301 or 22967244) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5502 — Merck/Schering-Plough, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-75/08: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — JOOP! v OHIM (!) (Community trade mark — Application for registration of a figurative Community trade mark representing an exclamation mark — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — No distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), cosmetic product, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2009282EN.01004302.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/43





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — JOOP! v OHIM (!)
(Case T-75/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for registration of a figurative Community trade mark representing an exclamation mark - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - No distinctive character acquired through use - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (c) and 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2009/C 282/81
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: JOOP! GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: H. Schmidt-Hollburg, W. Möllering, A. Löhde, H. Leo, A. Witte, T. Frank, A. Theil, H.-P. Rühland, B. Willers and T. Rein, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2007 (Case R 1134/2007-1) relating to an application for registration of a figurative sign as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JOOP! GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.
Case T-168/05: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Arkema v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for Monochloroacetic acid — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Market sharing and price fixing — Imputability of the unlawful conduct — Principle that penalties must fit the offence — Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based — Fines — Proportionality — Gravity and duration of the infringement — Deterrent effect — Actual impact on the market — Attenuating circumstances — Role of follower — Aggravating circumstances — Repeated infringement)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), chemical compound, fine, liability, parent company, restriction on competition, restrictive trade practice, subsidiary








C_2009282EN.01003502.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/35





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Arkema v Commission
(Case T-168/05) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for Monochloroacetic acid - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Market sharing and price fixing - Imputability of the unlawful conduct - Principle that penalties must fit the offence - Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based - Fines - Proportionality - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Deterrent effect - Actual impact on the market - Attenuating circumstances - Role of follower - Aggravating circumstances - Repeated infringement)
2009/C 282/65
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Arkema SA (Paris, France) (represented by: M. Debroux, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented: initially by A. Bouquet and F. Amato, then A. Bouquet and X. Lewis, Agents)

Re:

Primarily, annul Article 1(d), Article 2(c) and Article 4(9) of Commission Decision C(2004) 4876 final of 19 January 2005 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/ E-1/37.773 — MCAA) and, in the alternative, request to amend Article 2 (c) and (d) of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Arkema SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 171, of 9.7.2005.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5610 — Predica/SFL/Parholding) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: disclosure of information, economic concentration, financial services, insurance, merger control, property leasing, property market, restrictive-practice authorisation








C_2009235EN.01000501.xml










30.9.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 235/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5610 — Predica/SFL/Parholding)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 235/02
On 24 September 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in French and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5610. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-229/08: Order of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Impala v Commission (Competition — Concentration — Sony BMG joint venture — Original decision annulled by the Court of First Instance — New decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market — Action deprived of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2009-09-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), distributive trades, dominant position, economic concentration, merger control, music, patents licence, restrictive-practice authorisation








C_2009282EN.01004803.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/48





Order of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2009 — Impala v Commission
(Case T-229/08) (1)

(Competition - Concentration - Sony BMG joint venture - Original decision annulled by the Court of First Instance - New decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market - Action deprived of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
2009/C 282/93
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Independent Music Publishers and Labels Association (Impala, association internationale (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Crosby, J. Golding, Solicitors and I. Wekstein, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: X. Lewis, F. Arbault and K. Mojzesowicz, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Sony Corporation of America, (New York, New York, United States), (represented by N. Levy, Barrister, R. Snelders and T. Graf, lawyers); and Bertelsmann AG (Gütersloh, Germany) (represented by P. Chappatte, J. Boyce and A. Lyle-Smythe, Solicitors)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C (2007) 4507 of 3 October 2007 declaring compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement a concentration whereby the activities of Sony Corporation of America and Bertelsmann AG in the recorded music sector were combined into a joint venture (Case COMP/M.3333 — Sony/BMG), adopted following the annulment by the judgment delivered in Case T-464/04 Impala v Commission [2006] ECR II-2289 of Commission Decision 2005/188/EC of 19 July 2004 declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.3333 — Sony/BMG) (OJ 2005 L 62, p. 30).

Operative part of the order







1.


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










2.


Independent Music Publishers and Labels Association (Impala, association internationale) shall bear its own costs and those of the Commission of the European Communities.










3.


Bertelsmann AG and Sony Corporation of America shall bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 197, 2.8.2008.