do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-405/09: Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 — Deutsche Bahn v OHIM (Vertical combination of the colours grey and red) (Community trade mark — Application for Community trade mark consisting in a vertical combination of the colours grey and red — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011013EN.01002502.xml










15.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 13/25





Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 — Deutsche Bahn v OHIM (Vertical combination of the colours grey and red)
(Case T-405/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community trade mark consisting in a vertical combination of the colours grey and red - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 13/49
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Bahn AG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, K. Schmidt-Hern and B. Weichhaus, 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 23 July 2009 (Case R 372/2009-1) concerning an application for registration of a colour sign, consisting in the combination of the colours grey and red, as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Deutsche Bahn AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 297, 5.12.2009.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1023/2010 of 12 November 2010 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Jambon de l’Ardèche (PGI))
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, designation of origin, location of production, meat product, mode of production, product designation, product quality








L_2010296EN.01000501.xml










13.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 296/5








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1023/2010
of 12 November 2010
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Jambon de l’Ardèche (PGI))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Jambon de l’Ardèche’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 November 2010.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 76, 25.3.2010, p. 36.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.2.   Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.)

FRANCE
Jambon de l’Ardèche (PGI)
Case T-113/08: Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 — Spain v Commission (EAGGF — Guarantee Section — Expenditure excluded from Community financing — Aid for the production of olive oil — Aid for arable crop areas)
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAGGF Guarantee Section, European Commission, Spain, action for annulment, aid system, olive oil, regulation of agricultural production








C_2011013EN.01002303.xml










15.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 13/23





Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-113/08) (1)

(EAGGF - Guarantee Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Aid for the production of olive oil - Aid for arable crop areas)
2011/C 13/44
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: M. Muñoz Pérez, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agent)

Re:

Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2008/68/EC of 20 December 2007 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2008 L 18, p. 12), in so far as it relates to certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain in the olive oil and arable crop sectors

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the action;










2.


orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1024/2010 of 12 November 2010 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Farine de châtaigne corse/Farina castagnina corsa (PDO))
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: France, designation of origin, fruit product, location of production, mode of production, product designation, product quality








L_2010296EN.01000701.xml










13.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 296/7








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1024/2010
of 12 November 2010
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Farine de châtaigne corse/Farina castagnina corsa (PDO))


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 7(4) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Farine de châtaigne corse/Farina castagnina corsa’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 November 2010.


For the Commission


The President

José Manuel BARROSO
            





(1)  
            OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

(2)  
            OJ C 78, 27.3.2010, p. 7.




ANNEX
Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.6.   Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

FRANCE
Farine de châtaigne corse/Farina castagnina corsa (PDO)
Case F-117/10: Action brought on 12 November 2010 — Van Soest v Commission
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment, competition (EU)








C_2011030EN.01006602.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/66





Action brought on 12 November 2010 — Van Soest v Commission
(Case F-117/10)
()
2011/C 30/131
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Barry Van Soest (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Commission's decision terminating the procedure to recruit the applicant, who was successful in a competition and was included on the reserve list, because he did not hold a secondary education diploma giving access to post-secondary education.

Form of order sought







—


Annul decision HRB.2/TV/iu (2010) 6293;










—


annul decision HRD.2/AL/db Ares(2010) 511204 rejecting the applicant's complaint against that decision;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5986 — Schindler/Droege/ALSO/Actebis)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: communications industry, economic concentration, exchange of information, information technology industry, investment company, merger control, telecommunications industry








C_2010307EN.01002001.xml










12.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 307/20





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.5986 — Schindler/Droege/ALSO/Actebis)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2010/C 307/09






1.


On 5 November 2010 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking ALSO Holding AG (‘ALSO’, Switzerland), controlled by Schindler Holding AG (‘Schindler’, Switzerland), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control over the whole of the undertaking Actebis GmbH (‘Actebis’, Germany), controlled by Droege International Group AG (‘Droege’, Germany) by way of purchase of shares. At the same time Droege and Schindler acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking ALSO by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


ALSO: wholesale and logistics services for information technology products and consumer electronics in Europe,










—


Schindler: lifts and escalators, as well as IT wholesale,










—


Actebis: wholesale of products, solutions and services for information technology, telecommunications and consumer electronics in Europe,










—


Droege: consulting and investment. Droege provides management consultancy services and has majority holdings in undertakings in the pharmaceuticals, safety systems and ICT distribution sectors.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. 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), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5986 — Schindler/Droege/ALSO/Actebis, to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




J-70




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘EC Merger Regulation’).
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2010307EN.01000101.xml










12.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 307/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

11 November 2010
2010/C 307/01

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3700




JPY


Japanese yen


112,78




DKK


Danish krone


7,4538




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84910




SEK


Swedish krona


9,3102




CHF


Swiss franc


1,3282




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


8,0910




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,634




EEK


Estonian kroon


15,6466




HUF


Hungarian forint


276,54




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7093




PLN


Polish zloty


3,9329




RON


Romanian leu


4,2865




TRY


Turkish lira


1,9540




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3682




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3742




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,6198




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7495




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7646




KRW


South Korean won


1 520,57




ZAR


South African rand


9,4674




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,0772




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3727




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 206,66




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2442




PHP


Philippine peso


60,089




RUB


Russian rouble


41,9220




THB


Thai baht


40,710




BRL


Brazilian real


2,3491




MXN


Mexican peso


16,7769




INR


Indian rupee


60,9310






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 15 October 2009 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.589 — Heat Stabilisers (1) — Rapporteur: Malta
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: chemistry, dominant position, industrial chemistry, market-sharing agreement, merger control, restriction on competition, tin








C_2010307EN.01000201.xml










12.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 307/2





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 15 October 2009 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.589 — Heat Stabilisers (1)
Rapporteur: Malta
2010/C 307/02






1.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission assessment of the facts as an agreement and/or concerted practice within the meaning of Article 81 of the Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees that the complex of agreements and/or concerted practices constitutes two single and continuous infringements for tin stabilisers and ESBO/esters for the time frame in which they existed.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices have as object a restriction of competition.










4.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission assessment on the duration of the infringements for each addressee.










5.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission draft decision as regards the conclusion that the agreements and concerted practices between the addressees were capable of having an appreciable effect upon trade between EU Member States and between contracting parties of the EEA.










6.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission draft decision as regards the addressees of the decision, specifically with reference to imputation of liability to parent companies of the groups concerned.










7.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Special Report No 6/2010 ‘Has the reform of the sugar market achieved its main objectives?’
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, report








C_2010307EN.01001301.xml










12.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 307/13





Special Report No 6/2010 ‘Has the reform of the sugar market achieved its main objectives?’
2010/C 307/06
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 6/2010 ‘Has the reform of the sugar market achieved its main objectives?’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://www.eca.europa.eu
A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:





European Court of Auditors




Communication and Reports Unit




12, rue Alcide De Gasperi




1615 Luxembourg




LUXEMBOURG




Tel. +352 4398-1




E-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu




or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.
Case T-527/10: Action brought on 12 November 2010 — Google v OHIM — Giersch Ventures (GMail)
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, Internet, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011030EN.01004102.xml










29.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 30/41





Action brought on 12 November 2010 — Google v OHIM — Giersch Ventures (GMail)
(Case T-527/10)
()
2011/C 30/75
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Google, Inc. (Wilmington, United States) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey and A. Bognár, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Giersch Ventures LLC (Los Angeles, United States)

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 8 September 2010 in case R 342/2010-4; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark “GMail”, for goods and services in classes 9, 38 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 5685136

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: German trade mark registration No 30666860 of the word mark ‘G-mail’, registered for, among others, goods and services in classes 9, 38 and 42; German trade mark registration No 30025697 of the figurative mark ‘G-mail … und die Post geht richtig ab’, for services in classes 38, 39 and 42.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: The applicant considers that the contested decision infringes Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erred (i) in its visual comparison between the contested trade mark and the earlier opposed trade mark, (ii) in not taking into account the perception of the concerned consumer circles, (iii) in its assumption that the word elements of composite marks are always more coining than the visual elements, and disregarded case law in that respect, (iv) in its finding that the earlier word mark as a whole was not to be considered intrinsically weak, and (v) in its finding that the applicant’s arguments as regards the significance of the visual comparison over the phonetic comparison of the marks were inconclusive.
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 6 November 2009 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.589 — Heat Stabilisers (2) — Rapporteur: Malta
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: chemistry, dominant position, fine, industrial chemistry, market-sharing agreement, merger control, restriction on competition, tin








C_2010307EN.01000301.xml










12.11.2010   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 307/3





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 6 November 2009 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.589 — Heat Stabilisers (2)
Rapporteur: Malta
2010/C 307/03






1.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision with regard to the infringements.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission's reasoning on the basic amount of the fines.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the increase of the basic amount due to aggravating circumstances.










4.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the European Commission on the application of the 2002 Leniency Notice for immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases.










5.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.










6.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Case T-404/09: Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 — Deutsche Bahn v OHIM (Horizontal combination of the colours grey and red) (Community trade mark — Application for Community trade mark consisting in a horizontal combination of the colours grey and red — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2010-11-12
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011013EN.01002501.xml










15.1.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 13/25





Judgment of the General Court of 12 November 2010 — Deutsche Bahn v OHIM (Horizontal combination of the colours grey and red)
(Case T-404/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community trade mark consisting in a horizontal combination of the colours grey and red - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 13/48
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Bahn AG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, K. Schmidt-Hern and B. Weichhaus, 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 23 July 2009 (Case R 379/2009-1) concerning an application for registration of a colour sign, consisting in the combination of the colours grey and red, as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Deutsche Bahn AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 297, 5.12.2009.