do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-488/11: Action brought on 9 September 2011 — Sarc v Commission
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Commission, Netherlands, State aid, control of State aid








C_2011331EN.01002601.xml










12.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/26





Action brought on 9 September 2011 — Sarc v Commission
(Case T-488/11)
2011/C 331/50
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Scheepsbouwkundig Advies- en Rekencentrum (Sarc) BV (Bussum, Netherlands) (represented by: H. Speyart, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul Commission decision C(2011) 642 final of 10 May 2011 given in the State aid proceedings NN 68/2010 declaring that the aid granted does not constitute State aid; and










—


Order the European Commission to pay its own costs and those incurred by the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging






—


that the Commission failed, where it should have done so, to open the formal investigation procedure within the meaning of Article 108(2) TFEU;














2.


Second plea in law, alleging






—


that the Commission, in a further submission, failed to associate SARC in its preliminary assessment in a sufficient manner;














3.


Third plea in law, alleging






—


that the Commission misapplied Article 107 (1) TFEU;














4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging






—


that the Commission failed, where it should have done so, to order the Dutch authorities to submit an evaluation, or to commission an independent evaluation;














5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging






—


that the Commission failed to reason its decision to the required standard.
Case T-12/06: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Deltafina v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Italian market for the purchase and first processing of raw tobacco — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC — Price-fixing and market-sharing — Immunity from fines — Cooperation — Fines — Proportionality — Gravity of the infringement — Attenuating circumstances)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, competition, fine, fixing of prices, infringement of EU law, market-sharing agreement, tobacco industry








C_2011311EN.01003201.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/32





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Deltafina v Commission
(Case T-12/06) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Italian market for the purchase and first processing of raw tobacco - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Price-fixing and market-sharing - Immunity from fines - Cooperation - Fines - Proportionality - Gravity of the infringement - Attenuating circumstances)
2011/C 311/53
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Deltafina SpA (Orvieto, Italy) (represented by: R. Jacchia, A. Terranova, I. Van Bael, J.-F. Bellis and F. Di Gianni, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by A. Whelan and F. Amato, subsequently by A. Whelan and V. Di Bucci, and finally by É. Gippini Fournier and L. Malferrari, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment or, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on Deltafina by Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2005) 4012 final of 20 October 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81(1) [EC] (Case COMP/C.38.281/B.2 — Raw tobacco — Italy).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Deltafina SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.
Case T-479/11: Action brought on 9 September 2011 — France v Commission
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, control of State aid, investment protection, liability of the State, proof, public institution








C_2011340EN.01002601.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/26





Action brought on 9 September 2011 — France v Commission
(Case T-479/11)
2011/C 340/54
Language of the case: French

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul the contested decision in its entirety;










—


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) 4483 final of 29 June 2011 relating to State aid No NN C 35/2008 granted by France to the industrial and commercial public body, the Institut Français du Pétrole (French Petroleum Institute; ‘IFP’).
In support of the action, the applicant puts forward three pleas in law:






1.


First plea, alleging an error of law in that the Commission did not establish to the requisite legal standard the existence of State aid. The applicant argues that, when concluding that there was State aid, the Commission did not comply with the rules governing proof in relation to State aid, as regards either the burden of proof or the standard of proof.










2.


Second plea, divided into four parts, alleging errors of fact and law in so far as the Commission held there to be an implicit unlimited State guarantee in favour of the IFP. The applicant submits that:






—


an examination of French law does not show there to be a principle that the debts of the IFP are guaranteed by the State;










—


the fact that ordinary law procedures regarding receivership and insolvency are not applicable to the IFP does not mean that the creditors of such a body are in a more favourable situation than the creditors of an undertaking subject to commercial law;










—


the mechanisms for putting the State’s liability in issue cannot be likened to the mechanism of an unlimited guarantee;










—


the fact that certain debts connected with the public-service obligations of the IFP may be upheld is not related to the body’s status.














3.


Third plea, divided into two parts, alleging an error in the application of the concept of ‘advantage’ for the purposes of Article 107(1) TFEU, inasmuch as:






—


the Commission incorrectly concluded that the existence of a guarantee — were it to be established — would create an advantage in favour of the IFP;










—


in the alternative, the Commission misapplied the concept of advantage when it held that the advantage from which it claimed the IFP benefited on account of the guarantee resulting from its status was transferred to its private-law subsidiaries Axens and Prosernat.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6361 — ZF/Hansen)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2011265EN.01001901.xml










9.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 265/19





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6361 — ZF/Hansen)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 265/03






1.


On 26 August 2011, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking ZF Friedrichshafen AG (‘ZF’, Germany) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Hansen Transmissions International NV (‘Hansen’, Belgium) by way of purchase of shares resulting from a cash offer announced on 25 July 2011 and posted to Hansen Shareholders and Warrant holders on 18 August 2011.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for undertaking ZF: worldwide automotive supplier for driveline and chassis technology, active also in supply for aviation and marine industry components,










—


for undertaking Hansen: global wind turbine gearbox designer, manufacturer and supplier, active in particular in gear-driven multi-megawatt wind turbines.














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.6361 — ZF/Hansen, 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’).
Case T-36/09: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — dm-drogerie markt v OHIM — Distribuciones Mylar (dm) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark dm — Earlier national figurative mark dm — Administrative procedure — Decisions of the Opposition Divisions — Revocation — Correction of clerical errors — Legally non-existent measure — Admissibility of appeals before the Board of Appeal — Time-limit for filing an appeal — Legitimate expectations — Articles 59, 60a, 63 and 77a of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 60, 62, 65 and 80 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) — Rule 53 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01003901.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/39





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — dm-drogerie markt v OHIM — Distribuciones Mylar (dm)
(Case T-36/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark dm - Earlier national figurative mark dm - Administrative procedure - Decisions of the Opposition Divisions - Revocation - Correction of clerical errors - Legally non-existent measure - Admissibility of appeals before the Board of Appeal - Time-limit for filing an appeal - Legitimate expectations - Articles 59, 60a, 63 and 77a of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 60, 62, 65 and 80 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Rule 53 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)
2011/C 311/69
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG (Karlsruhe, Germany) (represented by: O. Bludovsky and C. Mellein, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by J. Novais Gonçalves and subsequently by G. Schneider, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Distribuciones Mylar, SA (Gelves, Spain)

Re:

Action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 October 2008 (Case R 228/2008-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Distribuciones Mylar, SA and dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 October 2008 (Case R 228/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Distribuciones Mylar, SA and dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG in so far as it did not declare the amended version of the Opposition Division’s decision of 16 May 2007 to be null and void;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders OHIM to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.
Case T-289/09: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Omnicare v OHIM — Astellas Pharma (OMNICARE CLINICAL RESEARCH) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark OMNICARE CLINICAL RESEARCH — Earlier national figurative mark OMNICARE — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Similarity of the services — Genuine use of the earlier mark)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical research, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011311EN.01004102.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/41





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Omnicare v OHIM — Astellas Pharma (OMNICARE CLINICAL RESEARCH)
(Case T-289/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark OMNICARE CLINICAL RESEARCH - Earlier national figurative mark OMNICARE - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the services - Genuine use of the earlier mark)
2011/C 311/74
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Omnicare, Inc. (Covington, Kentucky, United States) (represented by: M. Edenborough QC)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Astellas Pharma GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: C. Gutiérrez Martínez, H. Granado Carpenter and M. Polo Carreño, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 May 2009 (Case R 401/2008-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Yamanouchi Pharma GmbH and Omnicare, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Omnicare, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 244, 10.10.2009.
Case T-475/07: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Dow AgroSciences and Others v Commission (Plant-protection products — Active substance trifluralin — Non-inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC — Action for annulment — Evaluation procedure — New study and additional study — Time-limits — Concepts of risk and hazard — Manifest error of assessment — Draft review report — Draft directive or decision — Time-limits — Consequences of possible non-compliance — Legitimate expectations — Principle of proportionality — Decision 1999/468/EC ( the comitology decision ) — Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 — Article 3(3) — Plea of illegality)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: pharmaceutical product, plant health legislation, plant health product, withdrawal from the market








C_2011311EN.01003501.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/35





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Dow AgroSciences and Others v Commission
(Case T-475/07) (1)

(Plant-protection products - Active substance trifluralin - Non-inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC - Action for annulment - Evaluation procedure - New study and additional study - Time-limits - Concepts of ‘risk’ and ‘hazard’ - Manifest error of assessment - Draft review report - Draft directive or decision - Time-limits - Consequences of possible non-compliance - Legitimate expectations - Principle of proportionality - Decision 1999/468/EC (‘the comitology decision’) - Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 - Article 3(3) - Plea of illegality)
2011/C 311/61
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Dow AgroSciences Ltd (Hitchin, United Kingdom) and the 20 other applicants, the names of which are listed in the Annex (represented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Parpala and B. Doherty, acting as Agents, assisted by J. Stuyck, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/629/EC of 20 September 2007 concerning the non-inclusion of trifluralin in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products containing that substance (OJ 2007 L 255, p. 42).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Dow AgroSciences Ltd and the 20 other applicants, the names of which are listed in the Annex, to bear their own costs and also to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 51, 23.2.2008.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011265EN.01000101.xml










9.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 265/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

8 September 2011
2011/C 265/01

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,4044




JPY


Japanese yen


108,41




DKK


Danish krone


7,4478




GBP


Pound sterling


0,87670




SEK


Swedish krona


8,9556




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2135




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,5585




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,405




HUF


Hungarian forint


276,95




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7091




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2374




RON


Romanian leu


4,2515




TRY


Turkish lira


2,4815




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3212




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3825




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,9476




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6815




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7006




KRW


South Korean won


1 509,33




ZAR


South African rand


10,0704




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,9629




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4885




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 023,98




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2055




PHP


Philippine peso


59,573




RUB


Russian rouble


41,5153




THB


Thai baht


42,160




BRL


Brazilian real


2,3221




MXN


Mexican peso


17,5311




INR


Indian rupee


64,8760






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-274/09: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Deutsche Bahn v OHIM — DSB (IC4) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark IC4 — Earlier Community word mark ICE and earlier national figurative mark IC — Criteria for assessing likelihood of confusion — Relative grounds for refusal — Similarity of the services — Similarity of the signs — Distinctive character of the earlier mark — 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, transport company








C_2011311EN.01004002.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/40





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — Deutsche Bahn v OHIM — DSB (IC4)
(Case T-274/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark IC4 - Earlier Community word mark ICE and earlier national figurative mark IC - Criteria for assessing likelihood of confusion - Relative grounds for refusal - Similarity of the services - Similarity of the signs - Distinctive character of the earlier mark - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 311/72
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Deutsche Bahn AG (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: E. Haag, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: DSB (Copenhagen, Denmark) (represented by: T. Swanstrøm, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 April 2009 (Case R 1380/2007-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Deutsche Bahn AG and DSB

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 April 2009 (Case R 1380/2007-1) and the decision of the Opposition Division of OHIM of 26 July 2007;










2.


Orders OHIM to pay the costs incurred by Deutsche Bahn AG for the purposes of the present judicial proceedings and the proceedings before the Board of Appeal;










3.


Orders OHIM and DSB to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 220, 12.9.2009.
Case T-29/08: Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — LPN v Commission (Access to documents — Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 — Refusal of access — Documents concerning proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations concerning a dam project on the river Sabor — Exception concerning the protection of the objectives of inspections, investigations and audits — Environmental information — Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 — Obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination — Overriding public interest)
Date: 2011-09-09
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Portugal, access to information, civil engineering, environmental impact, environmental policy, provision of documents








C_2011311EN.01003701.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/37





Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — LPN v Commission
(Case T-29/08) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Refusal of access - Documents concerning proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations concerning a dam project on the river Sabor - Exception concerning the protection of the objectives of inspections, investigations and audits - Environmental information - Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 - Obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination - Overriding public interest)
2011/C 311/65
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Liga para Protecção de Natureza (LPN) (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: P. Vinagre e Silva, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Costa de Oliveira and D. Recchia, agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Denmark (represented initially by B. Weis Fogh, then by C. Vang, agents); Republic of Finland (represented initially by J. Heliskoski, A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, M. Pere and H. Leppo, then by J. Heliskoski and A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, agents); and Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk, S. Johannesson and K. Petkovska, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of the Commission decision of 22 November 2007 confirming the refusal to grant access to the documents contained in the file relating to proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations brought against the Portuguese Republic concerning a dam construction project on the river Sabor (Portugal) which could infringe Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ 1979 L 103, p. 1) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ 1992 L 206, p. 7).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action in so far at it relates to documents and parts of documents to which access was refused to the Liga para Protecção de Natureza (LPN) in Commission Decision SG.E.3/MIB/psi D(2008) 8639 of 24 October 2008;










2.


Rules that there is no further need to adjudicate as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the LPN to bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission;










4.


Orders the Kingdom of Denmark, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 79, 29.3.2008.