do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case F-44/11: Action brought on 13 April 2011 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, indemnification, physician








C_2011186EN.01003403.xml










25.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 186/34





Action brought on 13 April 2011 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-44/11)
2011/C 186/65
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for an order that the Commission pay the applicant a sum by way of compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered because of the Commission's Medical Officer’s request to the applicant’s doctor to provide certain information.

Form of order sought







—


Declare that there is no legal basis for or, in the alternative, annul the decision, in whatever form, rejecting the request in the applicant’s memorandum of 6 March 2010;










—


in so far as is necessary, declare that there is no legal basis for or, in the alternative, annul the measure, in whatever form, in which the Commission rejected the complaint of 3 September 2010;










—


in so far as is necessary, declare that Dr M., while an official of the European Commission: (a) asked Dr. U. to inform her whether the applicant ‘is currently receiving psychopharmacological treatment (neuroleptics, antidepressants) and if so what kind, or what other type of therapy he is receiving’; (b) informed Dr. U. that ‘in accordance with the provisions of the Staff Regulations, applicable to all officials of the European Commission, Mr [ZZ] has been officially resident in Brussels from 1 April 2002 and no longer in Angola, as decided by [his] superiors. and officially notified to his patient’;










—


in so far as is necessary, find that each of the acts giving rise to the damage in question is unlawful, in particular as regards the cumulative effect of those acts;










—


in so far as is necessary, declare that each of the acts giving rise to the damage in question is unlawful, in particular as regards the cumulative effect of those acts;










—


order the Commission to pay without delay to the applicant the sum of EUR 10 000, together with the interest on that sum, at the rate of 10 % per year, with annual capitalisation, starting from 5 July 2010, or such sum, including all additional amounts, as the Tribunal may consider fair and just in order to compensate the applicant for the damage in question;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Case T-179/10: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Zitro IP v OHIM — Show Ball Informática (BINGO SHOWALL) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark BINGO SHOWALL — Earlier figurative Community trade mark SHOW BALL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01002202.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/22





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Zitro IP v OHIM — Show Ball Informática (BINGO SHOWALL)
(Case T-179/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark BINGO SHOWALL - Earlier figurative Community trade mark SHOW BALL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 160/35
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Zitro IP Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: A. Canela Giménez, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Show Ball Informática Ltda (São Paulo, Brazil)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 February 2010 (Case R 666/2009-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Zitro IP Sàrl and Show Ball Informática Ltda

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Zitro IP Sàrl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.
Case T-159/10: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Air France v OHMI (Parallelogram shape) (Community trade mark — Application for Community figurative mark representing the shape of a parallelogram — Absolute ground of refusal — Absence of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, France, action for annulment (EU), airport, trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01002201.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/22





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Air France v OHMI (Parallelogram shape)
(Case T-159/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community figurative mark representing the shape of a parallelogram - Absolute ground of refusal - Absence of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 160/34
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Air France (Roissy-en-France, France) (represented by: A. Grolée, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 January 2010 (Case R 1018/2009-2) concerning an application for registration of a sign representing a parallelogram as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Air France to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.
Case T-393/10 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Westfälische Drahtindustrie and Others v Commission (Application for interim measures — Competition — Decision of the Commission imposing a fine — Bank guarantee — Application to suspend operation)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment, fine, infringement of EU law








C_2011282EN.01002002.xml










24.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/20





Order of the President of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Westfälische Drahtindustrie and Others v Commission
(Case T-393/10 R)
(Application for interim measures - Competition - Decision of the Commission imposing a fine - Bank guarantee - Application to suspend operation)
2011/C 282/40
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicants: Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH (Hamm, Germany); Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co KG (Hamm); and Pampus Industriebeteiligungen GmbH & Co KG (Iserlohn, Germany) (represented by: C. Stadler and N. Tkatchenko, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka, R. Sauer and C. Hödlmayr, agents, assisted by R. van der Hout, lawyer)

Re:

Application to suspend the operation of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Pre-stressing steel), as amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, in so far as a fine was thereby imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the order







1.


The obligation of Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH, Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and Pampus Industriebeteiligungen GmbH & Co. KG to provide the Commission with a bank guarantee in order to avoid immediate collection of the fines imposed on them under Article 2(1) of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 in a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Pre-stressing steel) as amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, is suspended under the following conditions






(a)


by 30 June 2011, Westfälische Drahtindustrie GmbH, Westfälische Drahtindustrie Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and Pampus Industriebeteiligungen GmbH & Co. KG shall pay the Commission the sum of EUR [confidential] million;










(b)


from 15 July 2011 until further notice they shall pay to the Commission monthly instalments of EUR 300 000 (on the 15th of each month), but not beyond delivery of judgment in the main proceedings.














2.


The costs are reserved.
Case T-209/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Alder Capital v OHIM — Gimv Nederland (ALDER CAPITAL) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark ALDER CAPITAL — Earlier Benelux word marks Halder and Halder Investments — Earlier international word mark Halder — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) — Genuine use of the trade mark — Article 15 of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 15 of Regulation No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), industrial capital, trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01001802.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/18





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Alder Capital v OHIM — Gimv Nederland (ALDER CAPITAL)
(Case T-209/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark ALDER CAPITAL - Earlier Benelux word marks Halder and Halder Investments - Earlier international word mark Halder - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 15 of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 15 of Regulation No 207/2009))
2011/C 160/25
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Alder Capital Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Gimv Nederland BV (The Hague, Netherlands) (represented by: M. van de Braak and S. Beelaard, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 February 2009 (Case R 486/2008-2) in relation to invalidity proceedings between Halder Holdings BV and Alder Capital Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Alder Capital Ltd to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Gimv Nederland BV for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).






(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.
Case F-30/09: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 13 April 2011 –Chaouch v Commission (Civil service — Remuneration — Installation allowance — Establishment of entitlement — Entry into service as probationary official — Change of residence after establishment to be taken into account — Official’s duty of residence under Article 20 of the Staff Regulations)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Central Bank, European Commission, action for annulment, damages, fixing of prices








C_2011252EN.01004903.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/49





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 13 April 2011 –Chaouch v Commission
(Case F-30/09) (1)

(Civil service - Remuneration - Installation allowance - Establishment of entitlement - Entry into service as probationary official - Change of residence after establishment to be taken into account - Official’s duty of residence under Article 20 of the Staff Regulations)
2011/C 252/105
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Dhikra Chaouch (Oetrange, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Moyse and A. Salerno, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin and J. Baquero Cruz, Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the Appointing Authority’s decision not to grant the applicant installation allowance

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses Mr. Chaouch’s action;










2.


Orders Mr. Chaouch to pay all the costs.






(1)  OJ C 129 of 06.06.2009, p. 21.
Closure notice regarding multiple complaints on collective rights management in Spain (reference No CHAP/2010/00310)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, Spain, complaint to the Commission, intellectual property








C_2011115EN.01000901.xml










13.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 115/9





Closure notice regarding multiple complaints on collective rights management in Spain
(reference No CHAP/2010/00310)
2011/C 115/06
By the pre-closure notice published in the OJ C 353, 28.12.2010, p. 17 regarding multiple complaints on collective rights management in Spain, (reference No CHAP/2010/00310) complainants were informed of the result of the Commission's examination of their complaints and of its intention to proceed with the closure of the dossier.
Given the absence of a response from the complainants within the indicated period of 30 days from the publication of the pre-closure notice, the Commission hereby confirms that their complaints were closed on the date of publication of this notice.
Case F-73/09: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Sukup v Commission (Civil service — Remuneration and allowances — Dependent child allowance — Education allowance — Retrospective award)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, education grant, family benefit








C_2011252EN.01005003.xml










27.8.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/50





Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Sukup v Commission
(Case F-73/09) (1)

(Civil service - Remuneration and allowances - Dependent child allowance - Education allowance - Retrospective award)
2011/C 252/108
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Viktor Sukup (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the European Commission’s Office for administration and payment of individual rights refusing to grant the applicant dependent child allowance or education allowance

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Sukup to pay all the costs.






(1)  OJ C 267, of 07.11.2009, p. 84.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011115EN.01000401.xml










13.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 115/4





Euro exchange rates (1)

12 April 2011
2011/C 115/04

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,4470




JPY


Japanese yen


121,87




DKK


Danish krone


7,4584




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88845




SEK


Swedish krona


9,0822




CHF


Swiss franc


1,3017




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8770




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,448




HUF


Hungarian forint


266,35




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7093




PLN


Polish zloty


3,9733




RON


Romanian leu


4,1150




TRY


Turkish lira


2,1938




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3783




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3864




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


11,2485




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8409




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,8184




KRW


South Korean won


1 580,16




ZAR


South African rand


9,6942




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


9,4638




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,3670




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 520,26




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,3793




PHP


Philippine peso


62,424




RUB


Russian rouble


40,6625




THB


Thai baht


43,613




BRL


Brazilian real


2,2859




MXN


Mexican peso


17,0312




INR


Indian rupee


64,2310






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-167/07: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Far Eastern New Century v Council (Dumping — Imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating in Taiwan — Determination of the dumping margin — Asymmetrical method of calculation — Export pricing pattern differing according to purchasers and time periods — Full degree of dumping margin cannot be reflected by symmetrical methods of calculation — Duty to state reasons)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Council of the European Union, India, action for annulment (EU), anti-dumping duty, import, originating product, plastics








C_2011160EN.01001501.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/15





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Far Eastern New Century v Council
(Case T-167/07) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating in Taiwan - Determination of the dumping margin - Asymmetrical method of calculation - Export pricing pattern differing according to purchasers and time periods - Full degree of dumping margin cannot be reflected by symmetrical methods of calculation - Duty to state reasons)
2011/C 160/17
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Far Eastern New Century Corp., formerly Far Eastern Textile Ltd (Taipei, Taiwan) (represented by: P. De Baere, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, Agents, and by G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially, H. van Vliet and K. Talabér-Ritz and, subsequently, H. van Vliet and M. França, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 of 22 February 2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyethylene terephthalate originating in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Taiwan following an expiry review and a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(2) and Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ 2007 L 59, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Far Eastern New Century Corp. to bear its own costs, together with those incurred by the Council of the European Union;










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.
Case F-32/10: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Wilk v Commission (Civil Service — Members of the temporary staff — Reimbursement of expenses — Installation allowance — Installation with family at the place of employment — Recovery of undue payments — Action manifestly inadmissible or manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: allowances and expenses, damages, divorce, indemnification, servant (EU)








C_2012138EN.01002803.xml










12.5.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/28






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 13 April 2011 — Wilk v Commission
(Case F-32/10) (1)

(Civil Service - Members of the temporary staff - Reimbursement of expenses - Installation allowance - Installation with family at the place of employment - Recovery of undue payments - Action manifestly inadmissible or manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(2012/C 138/60)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Christian Wilk (Trier, Germany) (represented by: R. Adam, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and D. Martin, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of decisions ordering recovery of one half of the installation allowance paid to the applicant following his divorce, and an application for damages

Operative part of the order







1.


Mr Wilk’s action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law.










2.


Mr Wilk is to bear all the costs.






(1)  OJ C 179, 3.7.2010, p. 60.
Case T-523/09: Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Smart Technologies v OHIM (WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law








C_2011160EN.01002102.xml










28.5.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 160/21





Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Smart Technologies v OHIM (WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH)
(Case T-523/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 160/32
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Smart Technologies ULC (Calgary, Canada) (represented by: M. Edenborough, QC, T. Elias, Barrister, and R. Harrison, Solicitor)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 September 2009 (Case R 554/2009-2), concerning an application for the word sign WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Smart Technologies ULC to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6140 — Dupont/Danisco)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-04-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical industry, economic concentration, exchange of information, foodstuff, merger control, research and development








C_2011115EN.01000101.xml










13.4.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 115/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6140 — Dupont/Danisco)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 115/01
On 4 April 2011, 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 32011M6140. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.