do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Action brought on 10 August 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Liechtenstein (Case E-11/10)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: EFTA Court, European standard, Liechtenstein, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, national implementing measure








C_2010292EN.01002701.xml










28.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/27





Action brought on 10 August 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against Liechtenstein
(Case E-11/10)
2010/C 292/09
An action against Lichtenstein was brought before the EFTA Court on 10 August 2010 by the EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by Xavier Lewis and Markus Schneider, acting as Agents of the EFTA Surveillance Authority, rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 35, 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË.
The EFTA Surveillance Authority requests the EFTA Court to declare that:






1.


By failing to adopt, or to notify the Authority of, the measures necessary to fully implement the Act referred to at point 21b of Annex XVIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast)), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, the Principality of Liechtenstein has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 33 of the Directive and under Article 7 EEA.










2.


The Principality of Liechtenstein bears the costs of these proceedings.





Legal and factual background and pleas in law adduced in support:







—


the application addresses the failure by Liechtenstein to fully comply with Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast),










—


it is stated in the Application that according to Article 33 of the Directive, read in conjuncture with EEA Joint Committee Decision No 33/2008, Liechtenstein was obliged to take the measures necessary to ensure full compliance with the Directive no later than 1 February 2009 and to communicate to the EFTA Surveillance Authority the text of those measures,










—


the EFTA Surveillance Authority pleads that it has not received information from the Liechtenstein government indicating that the Act has been fully implemented into national law, nor is it in possession of any other information which would enable it to conclude accordingly,










—


the Liechtenstein government has not disputed the delay in fully implementing the Act.
Case T-336/10: Action brought on 10/08/2010 — Abercrombie & Fitch Europe/OHMI — Gilli (GILLY HICKS)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010274EN.01002901.xml










9.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 274/29





Action brought on 10/08/2010 — Abercrombie & Fitch Europe/OHMI — Gilli (GILLY HICKS)
(Case T-336/10)
()
2010/C 274/44
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Abercrombie & Fitch Europe SA (Mendrisio, Switzerland) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, D. Stone and L. Ritchie, Solicitors)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gilli Srl (Milano, Italy)

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 20 May 2010 in case R 832/2008-1, and;










—


Order the defendant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark “GILLY HICKS”, for goods and services in classes 3, 14, 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 5194543

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration No 3566007 of the figurative mark “GILLI”, for goods in classes 3, 9, 14 and 25

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition partially

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision partially

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal did not carry out a correct visual, aural or conceptual comparison of the marks and therefore erred in relation to the likelihood of confusion.
Case T-326/10: Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Light grey, dark grey, beige, dark red and brown coloured checked pattern)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010288EN.01004302.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/43






Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Light grey, dark grey, beige, dark red and brown coloured checked pattern)
(Case T-326/10)
()
(2010/C 288/83)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

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

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 7 June 2010 in Case R 188/2010-4;










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a light grey, dark grey, beige, dark red and brown coloured checked pattern, for goods in Classes 18, 24 and 25.

Decision of the Examiner: Registration was refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) since the Community trade mark concerned does have distinctive character, and infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal did not address the applicant's extensive factual and legal submissions.


(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 107 and 108 TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections  Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex 1 of the Treaty
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Austria, State aid, control of State aid, farming sector, hunting








C_2010215EN.01000101.xml










10.8.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 215/1





Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 TFEU
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I of the Treaty)
2010/C 215/01






Date of adoption of the decision


19.4.2010




Reference number of State Aid


N 118/10




Member State


Austria




Region


Mixed




Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)


Rahmenregelung für landwirtschaftliche Beihilfemaßnahmen zur Bekämpfung der aktuellen Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise („Österreichregelung landwirtschaftliche Kleinbeihilfen“)




Legal basis


„Regelung zur vorübergehenden Gewährung geringfügiger Beihilfen im Geltungsbereich der Republik Österreich während der Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise (Österreichregelung landwirtschaftliche Kleinbeihilfen)“
Landwirtschaftsgesetz 1992, Landwirtschaftsgesetze der Länder




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy




Form of aid


Soft loan, Interest subsidy, Guarantee, Direct grant




Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme


EUR 1,20 million




Intensity


—




Duration (period)


Until 31.12.2010




Economic sectors


Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities




Name and address of the granting authority


Ämter der Landesregierungen, verschiedene Anschriften in den Bundesländern




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-327/10: Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Black, dark grey, light grey and dark red coloured checked pattern)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010288EN.01004401.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/44






Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Black, dark grey, light grey and dark red coloured checked pattern)
(Case T-327/10)
()
(2010/C 288/84)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

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

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 7 June 2010 in Case R 189/2010-4;










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a black, dark grey, light grey and dark red coloured checked pattern, for goods in Classes 18, 24 and 25.

Decision of the Examiner: Registration was refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) since the Community trade mark concerned does have distinctive character, and infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal did not address the applicant's extensive factual and legal submissions.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-332/10: Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Viaguara v OHIM — Pfizer (VIAGUARA)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010301EN.01003103.xml










6.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 301/31





Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Viaguara v OHIM — Pfizer (VIAGUARA)
(Case T-332/10)
()
2010/C 301/54
Language in which the application was lodged: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Viaguara S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: R. Skubisz, legal adviser)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Pfizer Inc.

Form of order sought







—


annul in its entirety the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 20 May 2010 in Case R 964/2009-1;










—


order the defendant and Pfizer Inc. to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Viaguara.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘VIAGUARA’ for goods in Classes 32 and 33 — application No 4630562.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Pfizer Inc.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community work mark ‘VIAGRA’ for goods in Class 5.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition dismissed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Decision of the Opposition Division annulled and trade mark application rejected in its entirety.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1) on account of an incorrect methodology for assessment of the connection between the marks and flawed findings in relation to the risk of exploitation of the repute and image of the trade mark cited in opposition.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version) (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-328/10: Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Dark grey, light grey, beige and dark red coloured checked pattern)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010288EN.01004402.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/44






Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Dark grey, light grey, beige and dark red coloured checked pattern)
(Case T-328/10)
()
(2010/C 288/85)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

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

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 7 June 2010 in Case R 190/2010-4;










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a dark grey, light grey, beige and dark red coloured checked pattern, for goods in Classes 18, 24 and 25.

Decision of the Examiner: Registration was refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) since the Community trade mark concerned does have distinctive character, and infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal did not address the applicant's extensive factual and legal submissions.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-329/10: Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Black, grey, beige and dark red coloured checked pattern)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010288EN.01004501.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/45






Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Fraas v OHIM (Black, grey, beige and dark red coloured checked pattern)
(Case T-329/10)
()
(2010/C 288/86)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)

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

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 7 June 2010 in Case R 191/2010-4;










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a black, grey, beige and dark red coloured checked pattern, for goods in Classes 18, 24 and 25.

Decision of the Examiner: Registration was refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) since the Community trade mark concerned does have distinctive character, and infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal did not address the applicant's extensive factual and legal submissions.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case T-334/10: Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Leifheit v OHIM — Vermop Salmon (Twist System)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment, trade-mark law








C_2010288EN.01004502.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/45






Action brought on 10 August 2010 — Leifheit v OHIM — Vermop Salmon (Twist System)
(Case T-334/10)
()
(2010/C 288/87)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Leifheit AG (Nassau, Germany) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt and V. Töbelmann, 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: Vermop Salmon GmbH (Gilching, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decisions of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 12 May 2010 in joined Cases R 924/2009-1 and R 1013/2009-1;










—


Order OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the applicant;










—


In the event that Vermop Salmon intervenes in the proceedings, order the intervener to bear its own 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 ‘Twist System’ for goods in Classes 7, 8 and 21

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: the applicant

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Vermop Salmon GmbH

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: the word mark ‘TWIX’ for goods in Class 21 and the word mark ‘TWIXTER’ for goods in Classes 9, 12, 21, 22 and 25

Decision of the Cancellation Division: The application for a declaration of invalidity was partially upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Vermop Salmon’s appeal to have the applicant’s mark declared invalid in respect of additional goods was upheld and the applicant’s appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 63(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) as the First Board of Appeal of OHIM did not examine whether the evidence of use put forward by Vermop Salmon is sufficient to prove genuine use of the earlier Community trade marks; infringement of the first and second sentences of Article 57(2) in conjunction with Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 as the evidence of use which Vermop Salmon placed on the case-file does not prove genuine use of the earlier Community trade marks; and infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 as the marks at issue are not similar.


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).
Case C-405/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Bruchsal (Germany) lodged on 10 August 2010 — Criminal proceedings against QB (*)
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, Lebanon, cross-border transport, interpretation of the law, transport market




C_2010288EN.01002202.xml










23.10.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 288/22






Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Bruchsal (Germany) lodged on 10 August 2010 — Criminal proceedings against  QB (*1)

(Case C-405/10)
()
(2010/C 288/38)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Bruchsal

Party to the main proceedings

 QB (*1)


Question referred

Are the rules in Article 37 of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of 14 June 2006 (1), in conjunction with Regulation (EC) No 1418/2007 of 29 November 2007 (2) to be interpreted as meaning that it is prohibited to ship to Lebanon waste which falls within waste category B 1120 of Annex IX to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal of 22 March 1989?


(*1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.

(1)  OJ 2006 L 190, p. 1


(2)  OJ 2007 L 316, p. 6
Project Europe 2030 : challenges and opportunities : a report to the European Council by the reflection group on the future of the EU 2030.
Date: 2010-08-10
Institutions: General Secretariat of the Council
Subjects: EU policy, European Union, deepening of the European Union, the EU's international role

PROJECT EUROPE 2030

Challenges and Opportunities

A report to the European Council 
by the Reflection Group  
on the Future of the EU 2030

Q
C
-
3
2
-
1
0
-
2
4
9
-
E
N

-
C

10.2860/9573

kg007662_EN_cover.indd   1
kg007662_EN_cover.indd   1

EN

22/07/10   12:11:04
22/07/10   12:11:04

 
kg007662_EN_cover.indd   2
kg007662_EN_cover.indd   2

22/07/10   12:11:07
22/07/10   12:11:07