do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-424/09: Action brought on 14 October 2009 — Goodyear Dunlop Tyres UK Ltd v OHIM — Sportfive (QUALIFIER)
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), brand name, pneumatic tyre, trade-mark law








C_2009312EN.01003802.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/38





Action brought on 14 October 2009 — Goodyear Dunlop Tyres UK Ltd v OHIM — Sportfive (QUALIFIER)
(Case T-424/09)
2009/C 312/63
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Goodyear Dunlop Tyres UK Ltd (Birmingham, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Graf, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sportfive GmbH & Co. KG (Cologne, Germany)

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 11 August 2009 in case R 1291/2008 4;










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Goodyear Dunlop Tyres UK Ltd

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark “QUALIFIER’ for goods in Class 12 (Application No 4 877 262)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Sportfive GmbH & Co. KG

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community word mark No 4 017 836 and German word mark No 30 415 017.1 ‘Qualifiers 2006’, German word/figurative mark No 30 414 610.2 ‘2006 QUALIFIERS’, the German word mark No 30 515 033.2 ‘Qualifiers 2008’ and German word/figurative mark Nr. 30 565 616.3 ‘2008 QUALIFIERS’, all registered inter alia for goods in Class 12

Decision of the Opposition Division: Allow the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1) in that there is a likelihood of confusion between the two marks


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, State aid, aquaculture, control of State aid, indemnification








C_2009246EN.01000501.xml










14.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/5





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 246/03






Date of adoption of the decision


27.5.2009




Reference number of State Aid


N 471/05




Member State


Italy




Region


Abruzzo




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Risarcimento dei danni subiti dagli acquacoltori




Legal basis


Legge finanziaria regionale n. 6/2005




Type of measure


Aid scheme




Objective


Compensation for damage




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


EUR 9 600




Intensity


40 %




Duration (period)


One financial year




Economic sectors


Aquaculture




Name and address of the granting authority







Giunta Regionale




Via Catullo n. 17




65127 Pescara PE




ITALIA








Other information


—




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/state_aids_texts_en.htm
Case T-412/09: Action brought on 14 October 2009 — CEA v Commission
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, France, action for annulment (EU), allowances and expenses, nuclear energy, pension scheme, research and development








C_2009312EN.01003502.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/35





Action brought on 14 October 2009 — CEA v Commission
(Case T-412/09)
2009/C 312/58
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Commissariat à l’énergie atomique (CEA) (Paris, France) (represented by: J. García-Gallardo Gil-Fournier, M. Arias Díaz and C. Humpe, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought







—


Acknowledge receipt of the application (application, authority to represent the applicant, together with copies and documents) and declare it admissible;










—


examine the application lodged for and on behalf of CEA by its legal representatives;










—


pursuant to Article 230 EC, annul the Commission’s decision — notified to CEA by a letter dated 29 July 2009 — refusing to treat the ‘indemnités de départ à la retraite’ (retirement allowances; ‘IDR’) paid by CEA as eligible indirect costs and to grant CEA a certificate on the accounting methodology;










—


in the alternative, declare, pursuant to Article 238 EC, (i) that the IDR is an eligible cost in accordance with the contractual provisions of the 7th Research Framework Programme, and (ii) that the European Community has failed to comply with its contractual commitments towards CEA in relation to the 7th Research Framework Programme;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Principally, by its action on the basis of Article 230 EC, the Commissariat à l’énergie atomique (CEA) seeks the annulment of the Commission’s final decision, notified to CEA on 29 July 2009, refusing to treat the retirement allowances paid by CEA as eligible indirect costs and to grant CEA a certificate on the accounting methodology so that it can declare its indirect personnel costs in order to obtain reimbursement of costs incurred during the implementation of projects which are co-financed in connection with the 7th Research Framework Programme.
CEA takes the view that the Commission’s decision that the retirement allowances do not constitute eligible indirect costs is based on errors of law and manifest errors of assessment of the facts, and that the Commission has failed to have regard to the principles of good administration, legal certainty, proportionality and the protection of legitimate expectations.
In the alternative, CEA seeks a declaration on the basis of Article 238 EC that the Commission has failed to comply with its contractual commitments towards CEA by refusing to treat the retirement allowances paid by CEA as eligible costs and, accordingly, to reimburse them.
Case T-140/08: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 14 October 2009 — Ferrero v OHIM — Tirol Milch (TiMi KiNDERJOGHURT) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community figurative trade mark TiMi KiNDERJOGHURT — Earlier word mark KINDER — Relative ground for refusal — Lack of similarity of the signs — Earlier opposition proceedings — Absence of res judicata — Article 8(1)(b), Article 8(5) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 [now Article 8(1)(b), Article 8(5) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Austria, European Union Intellectual Property Office, Italy, action for annulment (EU), confectionery product, trade-mark law








C_2009282EN.01004401.xml










21.11.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/44





Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 14 October 2009 — Ferrero v OHIM — Tirol Milch (TiMi KiNDERJOGHURT)
(Case T-140/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative trade mark TiMi KiNDERJOGHURT - Earlier word mark KINDER - Relative ground for refusal - Lack of similarity of the signs - Earlier opposition proceedings - Absence of res judicata - Article 8(1)(b), Article 8(5) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 [now Article 8(1)(b), Article 8(5) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2009/C 282/83
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ferrero SpA (Alba, Italy) (represented by: C. Gielen and F. Jacobacci, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Tirol Milch reg.Gen.mbH Innsbruck (Innsbruck, Austria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 January 2008 (Case R 682/2007-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Ferrero SpA and Tirol Milch reg.Gen.mbH Innsbruck.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ferrero SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 142, 7.6.2008.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5530 — Glaxo Smith Kline/Stiefel Laboratories) Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumer goods, disclosure of information, economic concentration, health care, marketing, medicinal product, merger control, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceutical product, restrictive-practice authorisation, skin disease








C_2009246EN.01000601.xml










14.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/6





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.5530 — Glaxo Smith Kline/Stiefel Laboratories)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2009/C 246/04
On 17 July 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 English 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 32009M5530. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 956/2009 of 14 October 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, grape, import price, pip fruit








L_2009270EN.01000101.xml










15.10.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 270/1








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 956/2009
of 14 October 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 15 October 2009.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 14 October 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 


MA 


69,8 




MK 


24,5 




TR 


64,0 




ZZ 


52,8 




0707 00 05 


TR 


133,3 




ZZ 


133,3 




0709 90 70 


TR 


112,6 




ZZ 


112,6 




0805 50 10 


AR 


90,1 




CL 


83,5 




TR 


79,0 




US 


79,7 




UY 


55,5 




ZA 


66,8 




ZZ 


75,8 




0806 10 10 


BR 


216,3 




TR 


118,0 




US 


186,7 




ZZ 


173,7 




0808 10 80 


AU 


175,3 




CL 


86,9 




CN 


78,6 




NZ 


71,3 




ZA 


71,4 




ZZ 


96,7 




0808 20 50 


CN 


58,3 




TR 


92,6 




ZA 


89,8 




ZZ 


80,2 






(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-414/09: Action brought on 14 October 2009 — Henkel v OHIM — JLO Holding (LIVE)
Date: 2009-10-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), brand name, cosmetic product, trade-mark law








C_2009312EN.01003601.xml










19.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 312/36





Action brought on 14 October 2009 — Henkel v OHIM — JLO Holding (LIVE)
(Case T-414/09)
2009/C 312/59
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: C. Milbradt, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: JLO Holding Company LLC (Santa Monica, United States of America)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 July 2009 in case R 609/2008-1 insofar as it made an order for revocation of the Community trade mark No 984 245‘LIVE’ for the goods, soaps, perfumery, cosmetic products and make-up;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: the word mark ‘LIVE’ for goods in Class 3 (Community trade mark No 984 245)

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: JLO Holding Company LLC

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Partial revocation of the Community trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partial annulment of the Cancellation Division's decision and partial revocation of the Community trade mark

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 51(1)(a) and Article 51(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1), on the ground that it was proved that the trade mark at issue in the proceedings had been used in such a way as to preserve the rights of the proprietor for the product group, soups, perfumery, cosmetic products and make-up


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