do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-522/11: Action brought on 28 September 2011 — Otero González v OHIM — Apli-Agipa (APLI-AGIPA)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, office supplies, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012013EN.01001601.xml










14.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 13/16





Action brought on 28 September 2011 — Otero González v OHIM — Apli-Agipa (APLI-AGIPA)
(Case T-522/11)
2012/C 13/33
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: José Luis Otero González (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Apli-Agipa SAS (Dormans, France)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 13 July 2011 in Case R 1454/2010-2 in relation to the partial granting of the application for the following goods ‘photographs, adhesives (glues) for stationery or household purposes; paint brushes, typewriters and office requisites (except furniture); instructional and teaching material (except apparatus); plastic materials for packaging (not included in other classes); printers’ type; printing blocks’;










—


refuse Community trade mark application No 5676382 ‘APLI-AGIPA’ in respect of all the goods granted in Class 16;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: Apli-Agipa SAS.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘APLI-AGIPA’ for goods in Class 16.

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish word mark ‘AGIPA’ and Spanish figurative mark that contains the word element ‘a-agipa’, both for goods in Class 16.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal upheld in part.

Plea in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, since there is a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.
Case T-356/10: Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — Nike International v OHIM — Deichmann (VICTORY RED) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for registration of the Community word mark VICTORY RED — Earlier international and national word marks Victory — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2011331EN.01001903.xml










12.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 331/19





Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — Nike International v OHIM — Deichmann (VICTORY RED)
(Case T-356/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for registration of the Community word mark VICTORY RED - Earlier international and national word marks Victory - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 331/36
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Nike International Ltd (Beaverton, Oregon, United States) (represented by: M. de Justo Bailey, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Deichmann SE (Essen, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 May 2010 (Case R 1309/2009-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Deichmann SE and Nike International Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Nike International Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 288, 23.10.2010.
Case F-95/11: Action brought on 28 September 2011 — ZZ v EIB
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Investment Bank, demotion, indemnification








C_2011347EN.01004603.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/46





Action brought on 28 September 2011 — ZZ v EIB
(Case F-95/11)
2011/C 347/88
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: N. Thieltgen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the implied decision by the EIB to alter the conditions of exercise and the nature of the applicant’s duties, and a claim for damages.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the implied decision by the EIB to alter the conditions of exercise and the nature of the applicant’s duties;










—


direct the EIB to reinstate the applicant in a post in accordance with his grade and employment;










—


declare the existence of administrative errors by the EIB;










—


declare the EIB liable to the applicant in respect of the unlawfulness of the decision and the administrative errors;










—


order the EIB to compensate the applicant for the material and non-material damage arising from the unlawful decision and administrative errors, plus interest for delay;






—


with regard to the unlawfulness of the decision:






—


for non-material damage, EUR 20 000;










—


for material damage by way of loss of remuneration, EUR 113 100;




with regard to the administrative errors:






—


for infringement by the EIB of its duty to have due regard for the welfare of officials and its duty of protection, EUR 119 100;










—


for infringement of Article 42 of the Staff Regulations, EUR 10 000


















—


order the EIB to pay the costs.
Corrigendum to the Rules governing public access to European Parliament documents — Bureau decision of 28 November 2001 ( OJ C 216, 22.7.2011 )
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Parliament, access to EU information, provision of documents








C_2011284EN.01003201.xml










28.9.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 284/32





Corrigendum to the Rules governing public access to European Parliament documents — Bureau decision of 28 November 2001
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 216 of 22 July 2011
)
2011/C 284/07
On page 22, Article 9(1):
for:

‘1.   Applications for access to a document held by the European Parliament shall be sent, on the same day as it is registered, by the unit responsible, which must acknowledge receipt of the application, draft a reply and deliver the document within the prescribed time limit.’,

read:

‘1.   Applications for access to a document held by the European Parliament shall be sent, on the same day as it is registered, to the unit responsible, which must acknowledge receipt of the application, draft a reply and deliver the document within the prescribed time limit.’
Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 of Member States and the Commission on explanatory documents
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: European Commission, The Member States
Subjects: directive (EU), exchange of information, national implementing measure, provision of documents








C_2011369EN.01001401.xml










17.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/14





Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 of Member States and the Commission on explanatory documents
2011/C 369/02
Pursuant to Article 288 TFEU, ‘A directive shall be binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods’.
Member States and the Commission recognise that the effective implementation of Union law is a prerequisite for achieving the policy objectives of the Union and that, whilst the responsibility for such implementation lies primarily with Member States, it is a matter of common interest since it aims, inter alia, to create a level playing field in all Member States.
Member States and the Commission acknowledge that the correct and timely transposition of Union directives is a legal obligation. They note that the Treaties entrust the Commission with the task of overseeing the application of Union law under the supervision of the Court of Justice and share the common understanding that the notification of transposition measures should facilitate the achievement by the Commission of this task.
In this context, Member States acknowledge that the information they supply to the Commission as regards the transposition of directives in national law ‘must be clear and precise’ and ‘must indicate unequivocally the laws, regulations and administrative provisions’, or any other provisions of national law, as well as, where relevant, the jurisprudence of national courts, by means of which the Member States consider that they have satisfied the various requirements imposed on them by the directive (1).
In order to improve the quality of information on the transposition of Union directives, where the Commission considers that documents explaining the relationship between the components of a directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition instruments are required, it shall justify on a case by case basis, when submitting the relevant proposals, the need for, and the proportionality of, providing such documents, taking into account, in particular and respectively, the complexity of the directive and of its transposition, as well as the possible additional administrative burden.
In justified cases, Member States undertake to accompany the notification of transposition measures with one or more explanatory documents, which can take the form of correlation tables or other documents serving the same purpose.


(1)  See Judgment of the Court of Justice of 16 July 2009 in case C-427/07, point 107 and the case-law cited therein.
Case T-206/11: Order of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — Complex v OHIM — Kajometal (KX) (Community trade mark — Refusal of registration — Withdrawal of application for registration — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, machine-tool industry, trade-mark law








C_2011347EN.01003301.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/33





Order of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — Complex v OHIM — Kajometal (KX)
(Case T-206/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Refusal of registration - Withdrawal of application for registration - No need to adjudicate)
2011/C 347/56
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Complex S.A. (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: R. Rumpel, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Kajometal s.r.o. (Dolný Kubín, Slovakia)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21 January 2011 (Case R 864/2010-2) in opposition proceedings between Complex S.A. and Kajometal s.r.o.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


Each party shall bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 194, 2.7.2011.
Modification of concessions in the schedules of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (EU-New Zealand agreement) *** European Parliament legislative resolution of 28 September 2011 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and New Zealand pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (06536/2011 – C7-0106/2011 – 2011/0029(NLE))
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: Committee on International Trade, European Parliament
Subjects: Bulgaria, GATT, New Zealand, Romania, accession to the European Union, agreement (EU), import (EU), ratification of an agreement, tariff agreement








CE2013056EN.01013901.xml










26.2.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 56/139





Wednesday 28 September 2011Modification of concessions in the schedules of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (EU-New Zealand agreement) ***
P7_TA(2011)0420
European Parliament legislative resolution of 28 September 2011 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and New Zealand pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (06536/2011 – C7-0106/2011 – 2011/0029(NLE))
2013/C 56 E/31
(Consent)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to the draft Council decision (06536/2011),










—


having regard to the draft Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and New Zealand pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (06537/2011),










—


having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 207(4), first subparagraph and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a)(v), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C7-0106/2011),










—


having regard to Rules 81 and 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on International Trade (A7-0295/2011),










1.


Consents to conclusion of the Agreement;










2.


Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of New Zealand.
Case F-12/11: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 28 September 2011 — Hecq v Commission (Civil service — Occupational disease — Invalidity procedure — Application to resume professional activity — Application for damages and interest)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, damages, disability insurance, occupational disease, pay, reintegration into working life








C_2011362EN.01002501.xml










10.12.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 362/25





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 28 September 2011 — Hecq v Commission
(Case F-12/11) (1)

(Civil service - Occupational disease - Invalidity procedure - Application to resume professional activity - Application for damages and interest)
2011/C 362/43
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Hecq (Chaumont-Gistoux, Belgium) (represented by: L. Vogel, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action for annulment of the implied decision rejecting the applicant’s request to resume his professional activities and for full payment of his remuneration as an official, calculated from 1 August 2003, and for damages, plus default interest calculated at a rate of 7 % per annum from 1 August 2003.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


Mr Hecq shall pay the entirety of the costs.






(1)  OJ C 113, 9.4.11, p. 22.
Case F-42/07: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 28 September 2011 — Prieto v Parliament (Staff case — Officials — Appointment — Internal competition published before 1 May 2004 — Member of the temporary staff appearing on the list of suitable candidates before 1 May 2006 — Grading — Articles 5(4) and 13(1) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations — Secretarial allowance — Action in part clearly inadmissible and in part clearly unfounded)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: appointment of staff, servant (EU), staff assessment, vocational retraining








C_2011340EN.01003901.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/39





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 28 September 2011 — Prieto v Parliament
(Case F-42/07) (1)

(Staff case - Officials - Appointment - Internal competition published before 1 May 2004 - Member of the temporary staff appearing on the list of suitable candidates before 1 May 2006 - Grading - Articles 5(4) and 13(1) of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations - Secretarial allowance - Action in part clearly inadmissible and in part clearly unfounded)
2011/C 340/79
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Antonio Prieto (Bousval, Belgium) (represented by É. Boigelot, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented, initially, by C. Burgos and K. Zejdová, and subsequently by K. Zejdová and N.B. Rasmussen, acting as Agents)

Re:

Annulment of the decision of the 9 June 2006 appointing the applicant, at that time a member of the temporary staff in Grade AST 3 and a successful candidate in internal competition C/348 for career C5-4, a probationary official in Grade AST 2, step 3.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action of MrPrieto is dismissed.










2.


Each party is ordered to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 140 of 23.06.07, p. 47.
Case T-384/11 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — Safa Nicu Sepahan v Council (Application for interim measures — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation — Freezing of funds and economic resources — Application for interim measures — Lack of urgency)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Iran, common foreign and security policy, nuclear non-proliferation








C_2011347EN.01003402.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/34





Order of the President of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — Safa Nicu Sepahan v Council
(Case T-384/11 R)
(Application for interim measures - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds and economic resources - Application for interim measures - Lack of urgency)
2011/C 347/61
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Safa Nicu Sepahan Co. (Isfahan, Iran) (represented by: A. Bahrami, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by: A. Vitro and R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro, and subsequently by: R. Liudvinaviciute-Cordeiro and I. Gurov, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for interim measures, including suspension of operation of point 19 of Table B of Annex I to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2011 of 23 May 2011 implementing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 on restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2011 L 136, p. 26), in so far as the list of persons and entities whose funds and economic resources are frozen includes an entity designated under the name of ‘Safa Nicu’.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.
Case T-96/09: Order of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — UCAPT v Council (Action for annulment — Common agricultural policy — Support schemes for farmers — Production aid for tobacco — Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 — Not of individual concern — Inadmissible)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: action for annulment (EU), agricultural cooperative, aid to agriculture, common agricultural policy, tobacco








C_2011347EN.01003103.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/31





Order of the General Court of 28 September 2011 — UCAPT v Council
(Case T-96/09) (1)

(Action for annulment - Common agricultural policy - Support schemes for farmers - Production aid for tobacco - Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 - Not of individual concern - Inadmissible)
2011/C 347/52
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Union des coopératives agricoles des producteurs de tabac de France (UCAPT) (Paris, France) (represented by: B. Peignot and D.F. Garreau, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Moore and P. Mahnič Bruni, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Banks and G. von Rintelen, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ 2009 L 30, p. 16)

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Union des coopératives agricoles des producteurs de tabac de France shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union, including the costs of the proceedings for interim measures.










3.


The European Commission shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 90, 18.4.2009.
Case F-6/11: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 28 September 2011 — M v EMA (Civil service — Action for damages — Action manifestly inadmissible)
Date: 2011-09-28
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: indemnification, occupational accident, occupational safety








C_2011340EN.01004002.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/40





Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 28 September 2011 — M v EMA
(Case F-6/11) (1)

(Civil service - Action for damages - Action manifestly inadmissible)
2011/C 340/82
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: M (Broxbourne, United Kingdom) (represented by: C. Thomann, Barrister, and I. Khawaja, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (represented by: V. Salvatore and N. Rampal Olmedo, Agents)

Re:

An action for damages seeking to obtain compensation for the loss allegedly sustained by the applicant following an accident in the workplace which was the result of the breach by the EMA of its obligations concerning the health and safety of workers arising from the European and UK rules.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.










2.


M shall bear all the costs.






(1)  OJ C 148, 5.6.2010, p. 37.