do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-491/11 P: Appeal brought on 19 September 2011 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 30 June 2011 in Case F-14/10, Marcuccio v Commission
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, disability insurance, regulations for civil servants








C_2011331EN.01002701.xml










12.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/27





Appeal brought on 19 September 2011 by Luigi Marcuccio against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 30 June 2011 in Case F-14/10, Marcuccio v Commission
(Case T-491/11 P)
2011/C 331/52
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought by the appellant







—


Annul in its entirety and without exception the order under appeal.










—


Allow in its entirety and without any exception whatsoever the relief sought at first instance.










—


Order the Commission to reimburse the appellant in respect of all costs, disbursements and fees incurred by him in relation both to the proceedings at first instance and the present appeal proceedings.










—


In the alternative, refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal, sitting in a different formation, for a fresh decision.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The present appeal is brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 30 June 2011 dismissing as manifestly lacking any foundation in law an action seeking an order that the Commission pay compensation to the appellant for the material and non-material damage suffered by the appellant as a result of the purportedly unreasonably lengthy duration of the procedure for recognising partial permanent invalidity.
The appellant relies on five grounds in support of the appeal.






1.


First ground, alleging error of law, including on the grounds of failure to state reasons and breach of the duty to carry out proper investigations, by failing quite simply in all cases to have regard to the fact that a European Union institution incurs liability in tort where it infringes the obligation it is under to give reasons for each of its decisions and by declaring the plea relied on by the appellant in that regard irrelevant.










2.


Second ground, alleging incorrect and unreasonable interpretation and application of the concept of the duty to state reasons.










3.


Third ground, alleging absolute failure to state reasons, including on the grounds of failure to carry out investigations, and procedural errors in that the Tribunal failed to declare that the Commission’s defence was clearly out of time and thus inadmissible.










4.


Fourth ground, alleging breach of Article 44 of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal and breach of the appellant’s right to a fair hearing and the rights of the defence.










5.


Fifth ground, alleging incorrect and unreasonable interpretation and application of Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal.
Case F-5/11: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 19 September 2011 — Mariën v Commission
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Afghanistan, damages, international civil servant, residential mobility








C_2012138EN.01004003.xml










12.5.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/40






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 19 September 2011 — Mariën v Commission
(Case F-5/11) (1)

(2012/C 138/101)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 139, 7.5.2011, p. 30.
Case C-476/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 19 September 2011 — HK Danmark acting on behalf of Glennie Kristensen v Experian A/S
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: age discrimination, sexual discrimination, social security, social-security contribution








C_2011340EN.01001102.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/11





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 19 September 2011 — HK Danmark acting on behalf of Glennie Kristensen v Experian A/S
(Case C-476/11)
2011/C 340/20
Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: HK Danmark acting on behalf of Glennie Kristensen

Defendant: Experian A/S

Questions referred







1.


Must the exception in Article 6(2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC (1) concerning the determination of age limits for admission to occupational social security schemes be interpreted as authorisation for the Member States to be able generally to except occupational social security schemes from the prohibition in Article 2 of the directive of direct or indirect discrimination on grounds of age in so far as that does not bring about discrimination on grounds of sex?










2.


Must the exception in Article 6(2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC concerning the determination of age limits for admission to occupational social security schemes be interpreted as not precluding a Member State from maintaining a legal situation in which an employer can pay, as part of pay, age-graded pension contributions, implying for example that the employer pays a pension contribution of 6 % for employees under 35, 8 % for employees from 35 to 44 and 10 % for employees over 45, in so far as that does not bring about discrimination on grounds of sex?






(1)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).
Case T-195/09: Order of the General Court of 19 September 2011 — Matkompaniet v OHIM — DF World of Spices (KATOZ) (Community trade mark — Opposition — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011340EN.01002003.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/20





Order of the General Court of 19 September 2011 — Matkompaniet v OHIM — DF World of Spices (KATOZ)
(Case T-195/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)
2011/C 340/42
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Matkompaniet AB (Borås, Sweden) (represented by: J. Gulliksson and J. Olson, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: DF World of Spices GmbH (Dissen, Germany) (represented by: A. Ebert-Weidenfeller and S. Schmüser, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 March 2009 (Case R 577/2008-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Matkompaniet AB and DF World of Spices GmbH

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no further need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and each of them shall pay half the costs of the defendant.






(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.
Case T-497/11: Action brought on 19 September 2011 — Euro-Information v OHIM (EURO AUTOMATIC PAIEMENT)
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, action for annulment (EU), banking, trade-mark law








C_2011370EN.01002502.xml










17.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 370/25





Action brought on 19 September 2011 — Euro-Information v OHIM (EURO AUTOMATIC PAIEMENT)
(Case T-497/11)
2011/C 370/42
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Euro-Information — Européenne de traitement de l’information (Strasbourg, France) (represented by: A. Grolée, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 7 July 2011 in Case R 370/2011-2;










—


Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before OHIM and in the present case





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘EURO AUTOMATIC PAIEMENT’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42 and 45

Decision of the Examiner: rejection of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 in so far as the mark submitted for registration is not descriptive.
Case T-495/11: Action brought on 19 September 2011 — Streng v OHIM — Gismondi (PARAMETRICA)
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, translation








C_2011347EN.01003701.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/37





Action brought on 19 September 2011 — Streng v OHIM — Gismondi (PARAMETRICA)
(Case T-495/11)
2011/C 347/67
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Michael Streng (Erding, Germany) (represented by: A. Pappert, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fulvio Gismondi (Roma, Italy)

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 19 July 2011 in case R 1348/2010-4, and refer the case back to the Fourth Board of Appeal; and










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘PARAMETRICA’, for services in classes 36 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 6048433

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German trade mark registration No 30311096 of the word mark ‘parameta’, for services in classes 35, 38, 41 and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the decision of the Opposition Division and rejected the opposition

Pleas in law: Infringement of Rules 19(2) and (3) in connection with Rule 98(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95, as the Board of Appeal wrongly considered that the submitted documents containing WIPO INID codes are not in the language of the proceedings and/or taken together with the translation provided in the writ of 3 November 2008, do not constitute ‘translation’ within the meaning of Rule 98(1) CTMIR.
Case T-473/09: Order of the General Court of 19 September 2011 — Matkompaniet v OHIM — DF World of Spices (KATOZ) (Community trade mark — Opposition — Withdrawal of the opposition — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, agricultural product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011340EN.01002101.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/21





Order of the General Court of 19 September 2011 — Matkompaniet v OHIM — DF World of Spices (KATOZ)
(Case T-473/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)
2011/C 340/43
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Matkompaniet AB (Borås, Sweden) (represented by: J. Gulliksson and J. Olson, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: DF World of Spices GmbH (Dissen, Germany) (represented by: A. Ebert-Weidenfeller and S. Schmüser, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 September 2009 (Case R 1023/2008-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Matkompaniet AB and DF World of Spices GmbH

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no further need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and each of them shall pay half the costs of the defendant.






(1)  OJ C 24, 30.1.2010.
Case F-15/11: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 19 September 2011 — Mariën v SEAE
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Afghanistan, damages, international civil servant, residential mobility








C_2012138EN.01004004.xml










12.5.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/40






Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 19 September 2011 — Mariën v SEAE
(Case F-15/11) (1)

(2012/C 138/102)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 139, 7.5.2011, p. 30-31.
Case C-474/11 P: Appeal brought on 19 September 2011 by Smanor SA against the order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 15 July 2011 in Case T-185/11 Smanor SA v European Commission, European Ombudsman
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for failure to act, free movement of goods, technical barriers to trade, yoghourt








C_2012227EN.01000602.xml










28.7.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 227/6





Appeal brought on 19 September 2011 by Smanor SA against the order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 15 July 2011 in Case T-185/11 Smanor SA v European Commission, European Ombudsman
(Case C-474/11 P)
2012/C 227/09
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Smanor SA (represented by: J.-P. Ekeu, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, European Ombudsman
By order of 1 March 2012, the Court (Eighth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered Smanor to bear its own costs.
Case T-368/07: Order of the General Court of 19 September 2011 — Lithuania v Commission
Date: 2011-09-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Lithuania, infringement of EU law, reduction of gas emissions, tradeable emission permit








C_2011340EN.01003201.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/32





Order of the General Court of 19 September 2011 — Lithuania v Commission
(Case T-368/07) (1)

2011/C 340/63
Language of the case: Lithuanian
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  C 283, 24.11.2007.