do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-416/12: Action brought on 20 September 2012 — HP Health Clubs Iberia v OHIM — Shiseido (ZENSATIONS)
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, health care, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2012355EN.01003501.xml










17.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/35





Action brought on 20 September 2012 — HP Health Clubs Iberia v OHIM — Shiseido (ZENSATIONS)
(Case T-416/12)
2012/C 355/73
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: HP Health Clubs Iberia, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Serrat Viñas, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Shiseido Company Ltd (Tokyo, Japan)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 June 2012 in Case R 2212/2010-1;










—


reject the opposition brought by Shiseido Company Ltd;










—


refer the case back to OHIM for it to register the mark is respect of which registration was sought for all the contested services; and










—


order the defendant and the other party involved in the case to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in these proceedings and in the earlier proceedings before OHIM.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Community trade mark concerned: figurative mark ‘ZENSATIONS’ for services in Classes 35 and 44 — Community trade mark No 5 778 303

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Shiseido Company Ltd

Mark or sign cited in opposition: word mark ‘ZEN’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 21 and 44

Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal upheld
Pleas in law:






—


Infringement of the second sentence of Article 75 and Article 76(1) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 8(2)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2012284EN.01001101.xml










20.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 284/11





Euro exchange rates (1)

19 September 2012
2012/C 284/03

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,3002




JPY


Japanese yen


102,38




DKK


Danish krone


7,4545




GBP


Pound sterling


0,80270




SEK


Swedish krona


8,5214




CHF


Swiss franc


1,2095




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


7,4315




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558




CZK


Czech koruna


24,870




HUF


Hungarian forint


283,10




LTL


Lithuanian litas


3,4528




LVL


Latvian lats


0,6962




PLN


Polish zloty


4,1353




RON


Romanian leu


4,5043




TRY


Turkish lira


2,3323




AUD


Australian dollar


1,2455




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,2672




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


10,0806




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5720




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5921




KRW


South Korean won


1 450,92




ZAR


South African rand


10,7164




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2040




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4000




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


12 407,35




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


3,9792




PHP


Philippine peso


54,165




RUB


Russian rouble


40,5170




THB


Thai baht


40,085




BRL


Brazilian real


2,6317




MXN


Mexican peso


16,6816




INR


Indian rupee


70,2040






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-421/09: Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2012 — DEI v Commission (Competition — Abuse of dominant position — Greek markets for the supply of lignite and wholesale electricity — Decision establishing the specific measures to correct the anti-competitive effects of an infringement of Article 86(1) EC, in conjunction with Article 82 EC, identified in an earlier decision — Article 86(3) EC — Annulment of the earlier decision)
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, coal, competition, domestic market, dominant position, electricity supply, infringement of EU law, mining extraction, public sector, wholesale selling








C_2012343EN.01001302.xml










10.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/13





Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2012 — DEI v Commission
(Case T-421/09) (1)

(Competition - Abuse of dominant position - Greek markets for the supply of lignite and wholesale electricity - Decision establishing the specific measures to correct the anti-competitive effects of an infringement of Article 86(1) EC, in conjunction with Article 82 EC, identified in an earlier decision - Article 86(3) EC - Annulment of the earlier decision)
2012/C 343/19
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Dimosia Epicheirisi Ilektrismou AE (DEI) (Athens, Greece) (represented by: P. Anestis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Christoforou and A. Antoniadis, Agents, and by A. Oikonomou, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: P. Mylonopoulos and K. Boskovits, Agents, and by M. Marinos, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 6244 final of 4 August 2009 establishing the specific measures to correct the anti-competitive effects of the infringement identified in the Commission Decision of 5 March 2008 on the granting or maintaining in force by the Hellenic Republic of rights in favour of DEI for the extraction of lignite.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Commission Decision C(2009) 6244 final of 4 August 2009 establishing the specific measures to correct the anti-competitive effects of the infringement identified in the Commission Decision of 5 March 2008 on the granting or maintaining in force by the Hellenic Republic of rights in favour of Dimosia Epicheirisi Ilektrismou AE (DEI) for the extraction of lignite;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs incurred by DEI, in addition to bearing its own;










3.


Orders the Hellenic Republic to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 11, 16.1.2010.
Case T-60/12: Order of the General Court of 20 September 2012 — Western Digital and Western Digital Ireland v Commission
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: confidentiality, electronic device, rights of the defence








C_2012355EN.01003802.xml










17.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/38





Order of the General Court of 20 September 2012 — Western Digital and Western Digital Ireland v Commission
(Case T-60/12) (1)

2012/C 355/81
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
State aid — Decision to raise no objections
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Norway, State aid, air conditioning, control of State aid, environmental protection, heating








C_2012284EN.01001401.xml










20.9.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 284/14





State aid — Decision to raise no objections
2012/C 284/06
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:







Date of adoption of the decision


:


9 May 2012




Case number


:


69491




Decision No


:


158/12/COL




EFTA State


:


Norway




Name of the beneficiary


:


Akershus Energi Varme AS




Type of measure


:


Individual aid under the Energy Fund Scheme, subject to a detailed assessment under Article 61(3)(c) of the Agreement




Scheme


:


The Energy Fund scheme approved by the EFTA Surveillance Authority with Decision No 248/11/COL




Objective


:


Environmental protection




Form of aid


:


Grant




Aid amount


:


NOK 73,1 million




Economic sectors


:


District heating and cooling




Name and address of the granting authority


:







Enova SF




Professor Borchsgt. 2




7030 Trondheim




NORWAY








The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:
http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/
Case T-452/11: Order of the General Court of 20 September 2012 — Western Digital and Western Digital Ireland v Commission
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: acquisition of property, economic concentration, market stabilisation, merger control








C_2012355EN.01003703.xml










17.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 355/37





Order of the General Court of 20 September 2012 — Western Digital and Western Digital Ireland v Commission
(Case T-452/11) (1)

2012/C 355/79
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 305, 15.10.2011.
Case T-413/12: Action brought on 20 September 2012 — Post Invest Europe v Commission
Date: 2012-09-20
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, State aid, domestic market, postal and telecommunications services, public sector








C_2012343EN.01002101.xml










10.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/21





Action brought on 20 September 2012 — Post Invest Europe v Commission
(Case T-413/12)
2012/C 343/35
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Post Invest Europe Sàrl (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: B. van de Walle de Ghelcke and T. Franchoo, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Annul Articles 2, 5, 6 and 7 of the Commission Decision of 25 January 2012 on the measure SA.14588 (C 20/2009) implemented by Belgium in favour of De Post-La Poste (now bpost), which was published in the Official Journal of the EU on 29 June 2012 (OJ 2012 L 170, p. 1);










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s finding that the retail network was not a distinct Service of General Economic Interest (‘SGEI’) entitled to compensation breaches Articles 106(2), 107(1) and 107(3) TFEU, constitutes a manifest error of assessment and violates the principle of equal treatment.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s failure to take into account part of the Universal Service Obligation (‘USO’) — induced retail network costs when calculating the amount of profits in the USO reserved area, which are above the level of a reasonable profit, breaches Articles 106(2), 107(1) and 107(3) TFEU and constitutes a manifest error of assessment.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s finding that net costs of non-mail SGEI’s must be offset with the profits from the USO reserved area, inasmuch as they exceed a reasonable profit, breaches Articles 107 and 106(2) TFEU and infringes the principles of proportionality and equal treatment.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that breach of Articles 107 and 106(2) TFEU and infringement of the principle of non-retroactivity, by reason of the complete failure to carry forward bpost’s undercompensation accumulated over the years 1992-2005 to offset the amounts of bpost’s alleged overcompensation over the period 2006-2010.