do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-526/09: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — PAKI Logistics v OHIM (PAKI) (Community trade mark — Application for the Community word mark PAKI — Absolute ground for refusal — Trade mark contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality — Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/209)
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, logistics, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2011340EN.01001703.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/17





Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — PAKI Logistics v OHIM (PAKI)
(Case T-526/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark PAKI - Absolute ground for refusal - Trade mark contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality - Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/209)
2011/C 340/34
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: PAKI Logistics (Ennepetal, Germany) (represented by M. Bergermann, P. Mes, C. Graf von der Groeben, G. Rother, J. Bühling, A. Verhauwen, J. Künzel, D. Jestaedt and J. Vogtmeier, lawyers)

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

Intervener in support of the defendant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented initially by S. Behzadi-Spencer and subsequently by F. Penlington, Agents, assisted by S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 October 2009 (Case R 1805/2007-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign PAKI as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders PAKI Logistics GmbH to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM);










3.


Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 80, 27.3.2010.
Case T-422/11 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Computer Resources International (Luxembourg) v Commission (Interim measures — Public procurement — Tendering procedure — Rejection of a tender — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Loss of opportunity — Lack of serious and irreparable damage — Lack of urgency)
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, award of contract, information technology industry








C_2011347EN.01003502.xml










26.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 347/35





Order of the President of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Computer Resources International (Luxembourg) v Commission
(Case T-422/11 R)
(Interim measures - Public procurement - Tendering procedure - Rejection of a tender - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Loss of opportunity - Lack of serious and irreparable damage - Lack of urgency)
2011/C 347/64
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Computer Resources International (Luxembourg) SA (Dommeldange, Luxembourg) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: S. Delaude and D. Calciu, Agents, and by E. Petritsi, lawyer)

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of the decision of the Publications Office of the European Union of 22 July 2011 which, on the one hand, rejects the tenders submitted by the applicant in tendering procedure AO 10340 concerning the supply of computing services for software development, maintenance, consultancy and assistance for different types of IT applications (OJ 2011/S 66-106099) and, on the other, informs the applicant that the relevant framework contract has been awarded to other tenderers.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim measures is dismissed.










2.


Costs are reserved.
Case T-39/06: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Transcatab 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 — Attributability of the unlawful conduct — Fines — Proportionality — Gravity and duration of the infringement — Attenuating circumstances — Cooperation)
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, competition, domestic market, fine, fixing of prices, infringement of EU law, market-sharing agreement, mitigating circumstances, offence, restriction on competition, tobacco industry








C_2011340EN.01001503.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/15





Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Transcatab v Commission
(Case T-39/06) (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 - Attributability of the unlawful conduct - Fines - Proportionality - Gravity and duration of the infringement - Attenuating circumstances - Cooperation)
2011/C 340/29
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Transcatab SpA (Caserta, Italy) (represented by: C. Osti and A. Prastaro, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by F. Amato, subsequently by V. Di Bucci, and lastly by É. Gippini Fournier and L. Malferrari, Agents, assisted by F. Ruggeri Laderchi, lawyer)

Re:

APPLICATION (i) for partial annulment 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); (ii) for a reduction in the fine imposed on Transcatab by that decision; and (iii) by way of counterclaim by the Commission, for the amount of that fine to be increased.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Dismisses the European Commission’s counterclaim;










3.


Orders Transcatab to bear its own costs and to pay 90 % of the costs incurred by the Commission;










4.


Orders the Commission to pay 10 % of its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.
Case T-421/10: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Cooperativa Vitivinícola Arousana v OHIM — Sotelo Ares (ROSALIA DE CASTRO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ROSALIA DE CASTRO — Earlier national word mark ROSALIA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods — Assessment of the conceptual similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_2011340EN.01001903.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/19





Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Cooperativa Vitivinícola Arousana v OHIM — Sotelo Ares (ROSALIA DE CASTRO)
(Case T-421/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark ROSALIA DE CASTRO - Earlier national word mark ROSALIA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the goods - Assessment of the conceptual similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2011/C 340/39
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Cooperativa Vitivinícola Arousana, S. Coop. Galega (Meaño, Spain) (represented by: E. Sánchez-Quiñones González, lawyer)

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, intervener before the General Court: María Constantina Sotelo Ares (Cambados, Spain) (represented by: C. Lema Devesa, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 July 2010 (Case R 1804/2008-4), relating to opposition proceedings between María Constantina Sotelo Ares and Cooperativa Vitivinícola Arousana, S. Coop. Galega.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Cooperativa Vitivinícola Arousana, S. Coop. Galega to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2011292EN.01000101.xml










5.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

4 October 2011
2011/C 292/01

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3181




JPY


Japanese yen


101,08




DKK


Danish krone


7,4426




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85650




SEK


Swedish krona


9,1628




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2169




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,8360




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,908




HUF


Hungarian forint


299,63




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,7092




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4069




RON


Romanian leu


4,3270




TRY


Turkish lira


2,5056




AUD


Australian dollar


1,3984




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3923




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,2623




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7573




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,7358




KRW


South Korean won


1 577,55




ZAR


South African rand


10,9663




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,3858




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5070




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


11 732,79




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,2196




PHP


Philippine peso


58,063




RUB


Russian rouble


43,3350




THB


Thai baht


41,125




BRL


Brazilian real


2,5024




MXN


Mexican peso


18,4850




INR


Indian rupee


65,1240






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6352 — Vitol/VTTI/ArcLight/Petro Lux) — Candidate case for simplified procedure Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, gas, investment, merger control, petroleum, primary product








C_2011292EN.01001001.xml










5.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/10





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6352 — Vitol/VTTI/ArcLight/Petro Lux)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 292/05






1.


On 26 September 2011, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Vitol B.V. (‘Vitol’, The Netherlands), a company controlled by Vitol Holding II SA (Luxembourg), and VTTI B.V. (‘VTTI’, The Netherlands), a company jointly controlled by Vitol and MSCI SDN. BHD (‘MTTI’, Malaysia), the latter being in turn indirectly controlled by Petroliam nasional Berhad (‘Petronas’, Malaysia), together with ArcLight Energy Partners Fund IV L.P. (‘ArcLight’, U.S.A.) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Petro Lux Sàrl (‘Petro Lux’, Luxembourg), the ultimate mother company of Petrotank Neutrale Tanklager GmbH (‘Petrotank’, Deutschland), by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Vitol: independent trading of various commodities and financial instruments relating in particular to the oil and gas sector,










—


for VTTI: ownership and operation of a network of petroleum products terminals,










—


for ArcLight: investments in the energy industry,










—


for Petrotank: storage and handling of mineral oil products and other liquid products.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










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 email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6352 — Vitol/VTTI/ArcLight/Petro Lux, 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’).

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).
Case T-19/06: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Mindo 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 — Payment of the fine by the jointly and severally liable debtor — Applicant involved in an insolvency procedure in the course of the proceedings — No longer any interest in bringing proceedings — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, competition, domestic market, financial solvency, fine, infringement of EU law, market-sharing agreement, offence, restriction on competition, tobacco industry








C_2011340EN.01001502.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/15





Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — Mindo v Commission
(Case T-19/06) (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 - Payment of the fine by the jointly and severally liable debtor - Applicant involved in an insolvency procedure in the course of the proceedings - No longer any interest in bringing proceedings - No need to adjudicate)
2011/C 340/28
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Mindo Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: J. Folguera Crespo and P. Vidal Martínez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by É. Gippini Fournier, N. Khan and F. Amato, and subsequently by É. Gippini Fournier, N. Khan and L. Malferrari, Agents)

Re:

Application for partial annulment 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) and, in the alternative, application for a reduction in the fine imposed on Mindo Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the action;










2.


Orders Mindo Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 60, 11.3.2006.
Case F-100/11: Action brought on 5 October 2011 — ZZ v Commission
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, indemnification, reassignment








C_2012025EN.01006703.xml










28.1.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 25/67






Action brought on 5 October 2011 — ZZ v Commission
(Case F-100/11)
(2012/C 25/129)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision by which the Commission refused to send the applicant the daily allowances linked to the decision relating to his transfer from the delegation in Angola to headquarters in Brussels.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Civil Service Tribunal should:






—


annul the decision issued by — or, in any event, attributable to — the Commission, rejecting — howsoever and whether in whole or in part — the claims set out in the application of 10 August 2010, sent to the appointing authority on 13 August 2010 at the latest;










—


annul, quatenus opus est, the note of 22 December 2010, which was received by the applicant on 11 February 2011 at the earliest;










—


annul the decision issued by the Commission rejecting, howsoever, the claims set out in the complaint of 24 February 2011;










—


order the Commission to transfer to the applicant the daily pecuniary allowances under Article 10 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, which were due to the applicant: (i) in relation to the decision of 18 March 2002, issued by the Commission, concerning the transfer of the applicant and of his post from the Commission’s Delegation in Luanda (Angola) to its central headquarters in Brussels, a judgment having been handed down in relation to that decision on 14 September 2011 in Case T-236/02 Marcuccio v Commission; and (ii) as from 1 April 2002, the day on which the decision of 18 March 2002 took effect, and for the subsequent 120 calendar days;










—


order the Commission to transfer to the applicant the interest on the allowances in question, that is to say, both default interest and interest to offset the monetary devaluation occurring between 31 July 2002 and the date of actual payment, the interest in question to be calculated at the rate of 10 % per annum, and with annual capitalisation with effect from 31 July 2002;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6391 — Dow/Mitsui/Brazilian Polyethylene JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: biofuel, chemical product, economic concentration, energy production, hydrocarbon, merger control, motor vehicle, non-ferrous metal, plastics, secondary sector








C_2011292EN.01000901.xml










5.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 292/9





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6391 — Dow/Mitsui/Brazilian Polyethylene JV)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2011/C 292/04






1.


On 23 September 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 undertakings The Dow Chemical Company (‘Dow’, USA) and Mitsui & Co., Ltd (‘Mitsui’, Japan) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Santa Vitória Açúcar e Álcool Ltda (‘Santa Vitória’, Brazil) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for Dow: active in the production of plastics and chemicals, agriculture sciences, hydrocarbon and energy products and services,










—


for Mitsui: trading house engaged in business areas such as iron and steel, non-ferrous metals, electronics, chemicals, energy-related commodities, motor vehicle and motorcycle parts and accessories,










—


for Santa Vitória: production of polyethylene with back-integration into ethylene, (bio-) ethanol and sugarcane.














3.


On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the EC Merger Regulation (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










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 email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.6391 — Dow/Mitsui/Brazilian Polyethylene JV, 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’).

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32 (‘Notice on a simplified procedure’).
Case T-118/09: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — La Sonrisa de Carmen and Bloom Clothes v OHIM — Heldmann (BLOOMCLOTHES) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark BLOOMCLOTHES — Earlier national word mark BLOOM — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
Date: 2011-10-05
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark








C_2011340EN.01001701.xml










19.11.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 340/17





Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2011 — La Sonrisa de Carmen and Bloom Clothes v OHIM — Heldmann (BLOOMCLOTHES)
(Case T-118/09) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark BLOOMCLOTHES - Earlier national word mark BLOOM - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2011/C 340/32
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicants: La Sonrisa de Carmen, SL (Vigo, Spain); and Bloom Clothes, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: S. Míguez Pereira, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Harald Heldmann (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: E. Günther, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 January 2009 (Case R 695/2008-2), relating to opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, Harald Heldmann and, on the other, La Sonrisa de Carmen, SL and Bloom Clothes, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders La Sonrisa de Carmen, SL and Bloom Clothes, SL to pay the costs, with the exception of those incurred by Harald Heldmann;










3.


Orders Mr Heldmann to bear his own costs.






(1)  OJ C 141, 20.6.2009.