do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-362/08 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 January 2010 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV v European Commission (Appeal — Access to documents of the institutions — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Action for annulment — Notion of measure open to challenge for the purposes of Article 230 EC)
Date: 2010-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, access to EU information, action for annulment (EU), disclosure of information








C_2010063EN.01000902.xml










13.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/9





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 January 2010 — Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV v European Commission
(Case C-362/08 P) (1)

(Appeal - Access to documents of the institutions - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Action for annulment - Notion of ‘measure open to challenge’ for the purposes of Article 230 EC)
2010/C 63/14
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV (represented by: H. Kaltenecker and R. Karpenstein, Rechtsanwälte)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira, S. Fries and by T. Scharf, Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) on 5 June 2008 in Case T-141/05 Internationaler Hilfsfonds e.V. v Commission, by which the Court of First Instance dismissed as inadmissible the action for annulment of the decision allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 14 February 2005 refusing to grant the appellant access to certain documents relating to Contract LIEN 97-2011 concerning the co-financing of a medical aid programme organised in Kazakhstan — Inadmissibility of an action for annulment brought against a measure that merely confirms an earlier decision not contested within the time-limit for initiating proceedings — Wrong classification of the contested measure — Inadmissibility of an action for annulment brought against a measure constituting an initial response, for the purposes of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 1049/2001 — Wrong interpretation of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 5 June 2008 in Case T-141/05 Internationaler Hilfsfonds v Commission;










2.


Rejects the plea of inadmissibility raised by the Commission of the European Communities before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities;










3.


Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union for judgment on the claims of Internationaler Hilfsfonds eV seeking annulment of the decision of the Commission of the European Communities of 14 February 2005 refusing it access to certain documents in the Commission’s possession;










4.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings and those arising at first instance relating to the plea of inadmissibility;










5.


Orders the costs to be reserved as to the remainder.






(1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.
Case T-34/10: Action brought on 26 January 2010 — Hairdreams v OHIM — Bartmann (MAGIC LIGHT)
Date: 2010-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2010100EN.01004601.xml










17.4.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 100/46





Action brought on 26 January 2010 — Hairdreams v OHIM — Bartmann (MAGIC LIGHT)
(Case T-34/10)
2010/C 100/71
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant:‘Hairdreams’ HaarhandelsgmbH (Graz, Austria) (represented by: G. Kresbach, 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: Rüdiger Bartmann (Gladbeck, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Amend the contested decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 November 2009 in Case R 656/2008-4 so that the applicant’s appeal of 22 April 2008 is upheld in its entirety and that the defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the opposition proceedings, the appeal and the present action;










—


in the alternative, annul the contested decision and refer it back to OHIM.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Hairdreams HaarhandelsgmbH

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘MAGIC LIGHT’ for goods in Classes 3, 8, 10, 21, 22, 26 and 44 (Application No 5 196 597)

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Rüdiger Bartmann

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the German word mark ‘MAGIC LIFE’ No 30 415 611 for goods in Class 3

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1) on the ground that the Board of Appeal erred in law in its assessment of the likelihood of confusion


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-38/10 P: Appeal brought on 26 January 2010 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 10 November 2009 in Case F-70/07, Marcuccio v Commission
Date: 2010-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Civil Service Tribunal, European Commission, European official, access to information, action for annulment (EU), admissibility, judicial proceedings, medical data, redemption








C_2010080EN.01004301.xml










27.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/43





Appeal brought on 26 January 2010 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 10 November 2009 in Case F-70/07, Marcuccio v Commission
(Case T-38/10 P)
2010/C 80/68
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant







—


In any event, set aside in its entirety and without exception the order under appeal.










—


Declare that the action at first instance, in relation to which the order under appeal was made, was admissible in its entirety and without any exception whatsoever.










—


Allow in its entirety and without any exception whatsoever the relief sought at first instance.










—


Order the Commission to reimburse the appellant in respect of all costs, disbursements and fees incurred by him in relation to both the proceedings at first instance and the present appeal proceedings.










—


In the alternative, refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal, sitting in a different formation, for a fresh decision.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) of 10 November 2009. That order dismissed as manifestly inadmissible the first, second, third and sixth heads of claim in an action for an order that the Commission pay compensation for the damage allegedly suffered as a result of the refusal to reimburse the appellant in respect of the recoverable costs purportedly incurred in Case T-176/04 Marcuccio v Commission.
In support of his claims, the appellant alleges misinterpretation and misapplication of the concept of a request within the meaning of Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations, illogical and unreasoned failure to have regard to the relevant case-law, absolute failure to state reasons, breach of the obligation to disregard the defence when it is lodged out of time, an error in accepting a document entitled ‘application for a declaration that there is no need to adjudicate’, and infringement of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-01-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010019EN.01001001.xml










26.1.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/10





Euro exchange rates (1)

25 January 2010
2010/C 19/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,4151




JPY


Japanese yen


127,74




DKK


Danish krone


7,4450




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87730




SEK


Swedish krona


10,2075




CHF


Swiss franc


1,4728




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,2020




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


26,011




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


271,18




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7083




PLN


Polish zloty


4,0674




RON


Romanian leu


4,1185




TRY


Turkish lira


2,1049




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5635




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4996




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,9929




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,9829




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,9810




KRW


South Korean won


1 627,65




ZAR


South African rand


10,7487




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,6607




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,2955




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


13 211,91




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8106




PHP


Philippine peso


65,430




RUB


Russian rouble


42,6050




THB


Thai baht


46,649




BRL


Brazilian real


2,5699




MXN


Mexican peso


18,2545




INR


Indian rupee


65,4060






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case C-118/08: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 January 2010 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Transportes Urbanos y Servicios Generales SAL v Administración del Estado (Procedural autonomy of the Member States — Principle of equivalence — Action for damages against the State — Breach of European Union law — Breach of the Constitution)
Date: 2010-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law, civil liability proceedings, general legal principle, interpretation of the law








C_2010063EN.01000402.xml










13.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/4





Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 January 2010 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — Transportes Urbanos y Servicios Generales SAL v Administración del Estado
(Case C-118/08) (1)

(Procedural autonomy of the Member States - Principle of equivalence - Action for damages against the State - Breach of European Union law - Breach of the Constitution)
2010/C 63/06
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Transportes Urbanos y Servicios Generales SAL

Defendant: Administración del Estado

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal Supremo (Spain) — Infringement by a Member State of the rights granted to individuals under European Union law — Obligation to remedy the damage caused — An act contrary to the constitution of a Member State and an act contrary to European Union law — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness

Operative part of the judgment

European Union law precludes the application of a rule of a Member State under which an action for damages against the State, alleging a breach of that law by national legislation which has been established by a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities given pursuant to Article 226 EC, can succeed only if the applicant has previously exhausted all domestic remedies for challenging the validity of a harmful administrative measure adopted on the basis of that legislation, when such a rule is not applicable to an action for damages against the State alleging breach of the Constitution by national legislation which has been established by the competent court.


(1)  OJ C 128, 24.5.2008.
Case T-28/10: Action brought on 26 January 2010 — Euro-Information v OHIM (EURO AUTOMATIC PAYMENT)
Date: 2010-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2010080EN.01003702.xml










27.3.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 80/37





Action brought on 26 January 2010 — Euro-Information v OHIM (EURO AUTOMATIC PAYMENT)
(Case T-28/10)
2010/C 80/62
Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties


Applicant: Européenne de traitement de l'information (Euro-Information) (Strasbourg, France) (represented by A. Grolée, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought







—


annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 11 November 2009 in Case R 635/2009-2 inasmuch as it dismissed the trade mark application No 7 077 654 for the goods and services which are the subject of this action;










—


grant Community trade mark application ‘EURO AUTOMATIC PAYMENT’ No 7 077 654 for all goods and services refused in Classes 9 and 36;










—


order OHIM to pay the applicant’s costs incurred in the proceedings before OHIM and in the present action, pursuant to Article 87 of the Rules of Procedure.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘EURO AUTOMATIC PAYMENT’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42 and 45 (Application for registration No 7 077 654).

Decision of the Examiner: Partial refusal of the registration.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 because, for all the goods and services refused for registration, the mark applied for is not descriptive but distinctive.