do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-83/09: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Chalk v OHIM — Reformed Spirits Company Holdings (CRAIC) (Community trade mark — Community word mark CRAIC — Assignments — Registration of the transfer of the mark — Revocation — Articles 16, 17, 23 and 77a of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 16, 17, 23 and 80 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) and Rule 31 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01003902.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/39





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Chalk v OHIM — Reformed Spirits Company Holdings (CRAIC)
(Case T-83/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Community word mark CRAIC - Assignments - Registration of the transfer of the mark - Revocation - Articles 16, 17, 23 and 77a of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 16, 17, 23 and 80 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) and Rule 31 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
2011/C 311/70
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: David Chalk (Canterbury, Kent, United Kingdom) (represented by: W. James, M. Gilbert, C. Balme, Solicitors, and S. Malynicz, Barrister)

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

The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Reformed Spirits Company Holdings Ltd (Saint Helier, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Morcom QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 November 2008 (Case R 1888/2007-2) relating to an application for registration of the transfer of a Community trade mark following an assignment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr David Chalk to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Reformed Spirits Company Holdings Ltd 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 90, 18.4.2009.
Case T-478/11: Action brought on 9 September 2011 — France v Commission
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, agricultural production, control of State aid, domestic market, quasi-fiscal charge








C_2011340EN.01002502.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/25





Action brought on 9 September 2011 — France v Commission
(Case T-478/11)
2011/C 340/53
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: French Republic (represented by: E. Belliard, G. de Bergues, J Gstalter and J. Rossi, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the contested decision;










—


Order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By its application, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2011) 4376 final of 29 June 2011 relating to State aid No NN 10/2010 concerning the action taken by the interprofession nationale porcine (French pig and pork producers association) (‘INAPORC’), which is financed by ‘voluntary’ contributions which have been made compulsory (‘CVCs’), levied by INAPORC on the members it represents. The Commission considered the CVCs to be measures constituting State aid compatible with the internal market.
In support of the action, the applicant puts forward a single plea in law, alleging that the concept of State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TEU was misapplied when the Commission held that the action taken by INAPORC, using income deriving from the CVCs, was imputable to the State and was financed by State resources.
The applicant argues that the action taken by INAPORC, using income deriving from the CVCs, meets the requirements set by the Court of Justice in Case C-345/02 Pearle and Others [2004] ECR I-7139 if compulsory contributions levied by a body representing undertakings in an economic sector are not to be regarded as State resources which finance action imputable to the State, since:






—


the action taken by INAPORC is determined by the professional body which represents undertakings in the agricultural sector concerned and is not an instrument for implementing State policy;










—


the action taken by INAPORC is financed by means of resources collected from undertakings in the sector;










—


the financing arrangements and the percentage/quantity of the contributions is established within INAPORC without the State intervening in any way;










—


the contributions have to be used for financing the measure, there being no possibility for the State to intervene.
Case T-232/06: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission (Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Provision of services for specification, development, maintenance and support of customs IT services relating to IT projects — Rejection of a tender — Award of the contract to another tenderer — Action for damages — Disregard of the procedural requirements — Inadmissibility — Action for annulment — Time allowed for the receipt of tenders — Time allowed for the submission of requests for information — Equal treatment — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: equal treatment, information technology industry, invitation to tender, services contract








C_2011311EN.01003301.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/33





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission
(Case T-232/06) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Provision of services for specification, development, maintenance and support of customs IT services relating to IT projects - Rejection of a tender - Award of the contract to another tenderer - Action for damages - Disregard of the procedural requirements - Inadmissibility - Action for annulment - Time allowed for the receipt of tenders - Time allowed for the submission of requests for information - Equal treatment - Manifest error of assessment)
2011/C 311/56
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis and N. Keramidas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin and E. Manhaeve, Agents)

Re:

APPLICATION for (i) annulment of the Commission’s decision of 19 June 2006 not to select the tender submitted by the consortium formed by the applicant and other companies in connection with a call for tenders for specification, development, maintenance and support of customs IT services relating to IT projects ‘CUST-DEV’ and to award the contract to another tenderer and (ii) damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 261, 28.10.2006.
Case T-199/10: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — DRV v OHIM — Austria Leasing (Austria Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H. Mitglied der Raiffeisen-Bankengruppe Österreich) (Community trade mark — Opposition Proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark Austria Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H Mitglied der Raiffeisen-Bankengruppe Österreich — Earlier national figurative mark Raiffeisen — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01004401.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/44





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — DRV v OHIM — Austria Leasing (Austria Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H. Mitglied der Raiffeisen-Bankengruppe Österreich)
(Case T-199/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition Proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark Austria Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H Mitglied der Raiffeisen-Bankengruppe Österreich - Earlier national figurative mark Raiffeisen - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 311/81
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Deutscher Raiffeisenverband e.V. (DRV) (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: I. Rinke, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Austria Leasing GmbH (Eschborn, Germany) (represented by: B. Joachim, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought for the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 February 2010 (Case R 253/2009-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Deutscher Raiffensenverband e.V. (DRV) and Austria Leasing GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Deutscher Raiffeisenverband e.V. (DRV) to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 179, 3.7.2010.
Case T-597/10: Order of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Biodes v OHIM — Manasul Internacional (BIESUL) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Revocation of the decision of the Board of Appeal — Cessation of existence of dispute — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011331EN.01002201.xml










12.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/22





Order of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Biodes v OHIM — Manasul Internacional (BIESUL)
(Case T-597/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Revocation of the decision of the Board of Appeal - Cessation of existence of dispute - No need to adjudicate)
2011/C 331/43
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Biodes, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, agent)


Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Manasul Internacional, SL

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 September 2010 (Case R 1519/2009-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Manasul Internacional, SL and Biodes, SL.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no further need to adjudicate on the present action.










2.


The Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)(OHIM) shall bear the costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.
Case C-466/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Brescia (Italy) lodged on 9 September 2011 — Gennaro Currà and Others v The Italian Republic
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil liability, crime against humanity, indemnification, slavery, war crime








C_2011347EN.01001201.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/12





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Brescia (Italy) lodged on 9 September 2011 — Gennaro Currà and Others v The Italian Republic
(Case C-466/11)
2011/C 347/17
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale ordinario di Brescia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Gennaro Currà and Others

Defendants: The Italian Republic

Questions referred







1.


On the basis of the international obligations resting upon Germany (Articles 2 and 5(2) of the London Agreement, etc.), are the alleged civil immunity from the Italian courts in relation to the facts of the present case, which, from 11 March 2004 onwards (the judgment in Ferrini), Germany may no longer claim, and the agreement reached with the Italian Government on 18 November 2008 in Trieste to initiate proceedings before the International Court (No 143/2008 General list), together with the related Italian Law No 89/2010, which renders unenforceable Italian judgments based on serious crimes against humanity, inconsistent with Article 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon and Articles 17, 47 and 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 18 December 2000?










2.


Is the application of Article 7 of the Reichsbeamtenhaftungsgesetz (judgment of 26 June 2003, AZ. III ZR 245/98) and of the Bundensverfassungsgericht (judgment of 15 February 2006, AZ. 2 Bvr 1476/03) relating to war crimes and crimes against humanity, which prevents European citizens from obtaining compensation from Germany, inconsistent with Article 2 of the 1953 London Agreement on German External Debts; did it undermine the plaintiffs’ rights under Articles 17 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 18 December 2000 until 11 March 2004 (the judgment in Ferrini), and is reliance on a time bar therefore inconsistent with European Union obligations and, in particular, Articles 3 and 4(3), first and last subparagraphs, of the Treaty of Lisbon and with the principle non conceditur contra venire factum proprio?










3.


Is the objection of immunity raised by the Federal Republic of Germany inconsistent with Articles 4(3), first and last subparagraphs, and 21 of the Treaty of Lisbon in that they preclude civil liability based on common European principles (Article 340) on the part of that defendant in relation to the violations of international law (the prohibition on slavery and forced labour) which it committed against the citizens of another Member State?
Case T-344/05: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Greece v Commission (EAGGF — Guaranteee Section — Expenditure excluded from Community financing — Beef — Extensification payment — Arable crops — Fruit and vegetables — Aid for processing of citrus fruit — Conditions for application of 100 % flat-rate financial correction — Proportionality)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAGGF Guarantee Section, EU financing arrangements, Greece, beef, crop production








C_2011311EN.01003102.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/31





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Greece v Commission
(Case T-344/05) (1)

(EAGGF - Guaranteee Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Beef - Extensification payment - Arable crops - Fruit and vegetables - Aid for processing of citrus fruit - Conditions for application of 100 % flat-rate financial correction - Proportionality)
2011/C 311/52
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: I. Khalkias and E. Svolopoulou, agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. Tserepa-Lacombe and L. Visaggio, agents, and by N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Re:

Partial annulment of Commission Decision 2055/555/EC of 15 July 2005, 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 2005 L 188, p. 36), in so far as it excludes certain expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic in the beef, arable crops and fruit and vegetables sectors.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision 2055/555/EC of 15 July 2005, excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) in so far as it excludes from Community financing expenditure incurred by the Hellenic Republic in respect of extensification payments made for the years 2000 and 2001;










2.


Dismisses the action for the remainder;










3.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to bear two thirds of its own costs and to pay two thirds of the costs of the European Commission;










4.


Orders the Commission to bear one third of its own costs and to pay one third of the costs of the Hellenic Republic.






(1)  OJ C 281, 12.11.2005.
Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, State aid, control of State aid, primary sector, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2011266EN.01001801.xml










9.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 266/18





Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 266/02







Reference number of the State Aid


SA.28361 (X 430/09)




Member State


Italy




Member State reference number


—




Name of the Region (NUTS)


TRENTO
Article 107(3)(c)




Granting authority







PROVINCIA AUTONOMA DI TRENTO — DIPARTIMENTO AGRICOLTURA E ALIMENTAZIONE




Via G.B. Trener 3




38100 TRENTO




ITALY




www.trentinoagricoltura.it




www.provincia.tn.it








Title of the aid measure


Legge provinciale 28 marzo 2003, n. 4 e s.m.i., recante norme per il «Sostegno dell'economia agricola, disciplina dell'agricoltura biologica e della contrassegnazione di prodotti geneticamente non modificati»: approvazione dei criteri e delle moda …




National legal basis (Reference to the relevant national official publication)








—


l.p. 28 marzo 2003, n. 4: articoli 25, 28, 42, 44 e 46, comma 1;










—


deliberazione edlla Giunta provinciale n. 609 del 20 marzo 2009.








Type of measure


Scheme




Amendment of an existing aid measure


—




Duration


1.1.2008—31.12.2013




Economic sector(s) concerned


Support activities for crop production, Support activities for animal production




Type of beneficiary


SME




Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme


EUR 15,00 (in millions)




For guarantees


—




Aid Instrument (Article 5)


Direct grant




Reference to the Commission Decision


—




If co-financed by Community funds


—




Objectives


Maximum aid intensity in % or Maximum aid amount in national currency


SME-bonuses in %




SME investment and employment aid (Art.15)


40 %


—




Web link to the full text of the aid measure:






 


http://www.consiglio.provincia.tn.it/banche_dati.it.asp










 


http://www.delibere.provincia.tn.it/
Case C-198/10: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 September 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Milano (Italy)) — Cassina S.p.A v Alivar Srl, Galliani Host Arredamenti Srl (First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Industrial and commercial property — Directive 98/71/EC — Legal protection of designs — Article 17 — Obligation concerning the cumulation of design protection with copyright protection — National law precluding copyright protection in the case of designs which entered the public domain before its entry into force)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: designs and models, industrial property, intellectual property, public property








C_2012025EN.01002101.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/21






Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 9 September 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Corte d’appello di Milano (Italy)) — Cassina S.p.A v Alivar Srl, Galliani Host Arredamenti Srl
(Case C-198/10) (1)

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Industrial and commercial property - Directive 98/71/EC - Legal protection of designs - Article 17 - Obligation concerning the cumulation of design protection with copyright protection - National law precluding copyright protection in the case of designs which entered the public domain before its entry into force)
(2012/C 25/35)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte d’appello di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Cassina S.p.A

Defendants: Alivar Srl, Galliani Host Arredamenti Srl

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corte d’appello di Milano — Interpretation of Articles 17 and 19 of Directive 98/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 on the legal protection of designs — National legislation which transposed the directive into national law by introducing copyright protection for designs — Right of a Member State to extend the conditions for the grant of such protection

Operative part of the order

Article 17 of Directive 98/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 on the legal protection of designs, must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which either excludes, either completely or within the limits of prior use, from protection by the law of copyright of that Member State designs which have entered the public domain before the entry into force of that legislation, with regard to all third parties who have previously manufactured or marketed in the national territory products based on those designs before that date.


(1)  OJ C 179, 3.7.2010.
Case T-382/09: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Ergo Versicherungsgruppe v OHIM — DeguDent (ERGO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ERGO — Prior Community and national word marks CERGO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Duty to rule on the entirety of the action — Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal — Article 64(1) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dental medicine, pharmaceutical industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01004201.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/42





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Ergo Versicherungsgruppe v OHIM — DeguDent (ERGO)
(Case T-382/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ERGO - Prior Community and national word marks CERGO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Duty to rule on the entirety of the action - Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal - Article 64(1) of Regulation No 207/2009)
2011/C 311/76
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Ergo Versicherungsgruppe AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, A.W. Renck, T. Dolde and J. Pause, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: DeguDent GmbH (Hanau, Germany) (represented by: initially W. Blau, then W. Blau, D. Kaya and C. Kusulis, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 July 2009 (Case R 44/2008-4) concerning opposition proceedings between DeguDent GmbH and Ergo Versicherungsgruppe AG

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 23 July 2009 (Case R 44/2008-4) in so far as the Board of Appeal omitted to rule on the action brought before it as regards the goods in Class 5










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders Ergo Versicherungsgruppe AG, DeguDent Gmbh and OHIM to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 297, 5.12.2009.