do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-42/12 P: Order of the Court of 29 November 2012 — Václav Hrbek v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd, formerly The Outdoor Group Ltd (Appeals — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(1)(b) — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Figurative mark — Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark — Appeal clearly inadmissible and clearly unfounded)
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2013108EN.01000802.xml










13.4.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/8





Order of the Court of 29 November 2012 — Václav Hrbek v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd, formerly The Outdoor Group Ltd
(Case C-42/12 P) (1)

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(1)(b) - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Figurative mark - Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark - Appeal clearly inadmissible and clearly unfounded)
2013/C 108/15
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Václav Hrbek (represented by: M. Sabatier, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent), Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd, formerly The Outdoor Group Ltd (represented by: M.S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2011 in Case T-434/10 Hrbek v OHIM — Outdoor Group (ALPINE PRO SPORTSWEAR & EQUIPMENT), by which the General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by the appellant against Decision R 1441/2009-2 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 July 2010, rejecting the action brought against the decision of the opposition division partially refusing registration of the figurative mark comprising the word elements ‘ALPINE PRO SPORTSWEAR & EQUIPMENT’ for goods in Classes 18, 24, 25 and 28 in the context of the opposition made by the holder of the Community figurative mark comprising the word element ‘alpine’ for goods in Classes 18 and 25 — Interpretation and application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Likelihood of confusion

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Mr Václav Hrbek is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6699 — MEP/Walach Bros/Walmark)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, investment company, merger control, milk product








C_2012369EN.01000501.xml










29.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/5





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case COMP/M.6699 — MEP/Walach Bros/Walmark)
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 369/03
On 21 November 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6699. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.
Case T-164/12: Order of the General Court of 4 December 2014  — Alstom v Commission (Competition — Action for damages brought before a national court — Request for cooperation — Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Decision of the Commission to transmit information to a national court — Withdrawal of the request — Withdrawal of the decision — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU competition policy, confidentiality, dissemination of information, indemnification, professional secret








C_2015056EN.01001701.xml










16.2.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 56/17





Order of the General Court of 4 December 2014 — Alstom v Commission
(Case T-164/12) (1)

((Competition - Action for damages brought before a national court - Request for cooperation - Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Decision of the Commission to transmit information to a national court - Withdrawal of the request - Withdrawal of the decision - No need to adjudicate))
(2015/C 056/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Alstom (Levallois-Perret, France) (represented: initially by J. Derenne, lawyer, N. Heaton, P. Chaplin and M. Farley, Solicitors, and subsequently by J Derenne, N Heaton and P Chaplin)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Antoniadis, N. Khan and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Magnus, C. Bryant, E. Coulson, Solicitors, J. Turner QC, D. Beard QC and L. John, Barrister)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision, communicated to the applicant by letter of 26 January 2012 of the Director General of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition under reference D/2012/006840, to accede to the request for cooperation from the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, in so far as it involves the disclosure of information allegedly covered by the obligation of professional secrecy in the applicant’s reply to the statement of objections in Case COMP/F/38.899 — Gas insulated switchgear.

Operative part of the order







1)


There is no need to adjudicate on the action.










2)


The parties shall bear their own costs, including those incurred in the proceedings for interim measures.






(1)  OJ C 165, 9.6.2012.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6793 — AEA/OTPP/Dematic) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: automation, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, pension scheme








C_2012369EN.01001501.xml










29.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/15





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case COMP/M.6793 — AEA/OTPP/Dematic)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
2012/C 369/13






1.


On 23 November 2012, 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 AEA Investors LP (‘AEA’, USA) and Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Board (‘OTPP’, Canada) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of the undertaking of Dematic Holding Sárl (‘Dematic’, Luxemburg) by way of purchase of shares.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






—


for AEA: private equity investment group with primary business activity of identifying investment opportunities for investors, structuring investment transactions through investment vehicles, on behalf of the general partners of its funds, and managing and disposing of such investments to create returns for investors in its funds,










—


for OTPP: administering the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan and managing its investments,










—


for Dematic: designing, manufacturing, integrating and servicing automated handling systems which are used in warehousing and distribution operations.














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.6793 — AEA/OTPP/Dematic, 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’).
Joined Cases T-537/10 and T-538/10: Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2012 — Adamowski v OHIM — Fagumit (FAGUMIT) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark Fagumit and Community figurative mark FAGUMIT — Earlier national figurative mark FAGUMIT — Relative ground for invalidity — Article 8(3) and Article 165(4)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pneumatic tyre, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2013026EN.01004003.xml










26.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/40





Judgment of the General Court of 29 November 2012 — Adamowski v OHIM — Fagumit (FAGUMIT)
(Joined Cases T-537/10 and T-538/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark Fagumit and Community figurative mark FAGUMIT - Earlier national figurative mark FAGUMIT - Relative ground for invalidity - Article 8(3) and Article 165(4)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
2013/C 26/77
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Ursula Adamowski (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: D. von Schultz, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit sp. z o.o. (Fagumit) (Wolbrom, Poland) (represented by: M. Krekora, T. Targosz and P. Podrecki, lawyers)

Re:

Two actions brought against two decisions of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 September 2010 (Cases R 1002/2009-1 and R 1003/2009-1), concerning invalidity proceedings between Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit sp. z o.o. and Ursula Adamowski.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Orders that Cases T-537/10 and T-538/10 be joined for the purposes of judgment;










2.


Dismisses the actions;










3.


Orders Ursula Adamowski to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and by Fabryka Węży Gumowych i Tworzyw Sztucznych Fagumit sp. z o.o. relating to the proceedings before the Court.






(1)  OJ C 30, 29.1.2011.
Case T-164/12 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 29 November 2012 — Alstom v Commission (Interim relief — Competition — Commission decision to transmit documents to a national court — Confidentiality — Right to effective judicial protection — Application for interim measures — Prima facie case — Urgency — Weighing up of interests)
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: confidentiality, professional secret, provision of documents, right to justice








C_2013026EN.01004902.xml










26.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/49





Order of the President of the General Court of 29 November 2012 — Alstom v Commission
(Case T-164/12 R)
(Interim relief - Competition - Commission decision to transmit documents to a national court - Confidentiality - Right to effective judicial protection - Application for interim measures - Prima facie case - Urgency - Weighing up of interests)
2013/C 26/99
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Alstom (Levallois-Perret, France) (represented by: J. Derenne, lawyer, N. Heaton, P. Chaplin and M. Farley, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Antoniadis, N. Khan and P. Van Nuffel, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Magnus, C. Bryant and E. Coulson, Solicitors, J. Turner QC and D. Beard QC)

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of the Commission’s decision of 26 January 2012 contained in letters No D/2012/006840 and No D/2012/006863 from the Director General of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition, concerning the transmission of certain documents to the High Court of England and Wales for use in evidence in proceedings brought against the applicant, and an application for confidential treatment to be ordered in the present proceedings in respect of the professional secrets contained in the applicant’s reply of 30 June 2006 to the statement of objections in Case COMP/F/38.899 — Gas insulated switchgear.

Operative part of the order







1.


Operation of the Commission’s decision of 26 January 2012 is suspended in so far as that decision concerns the transmission to the High Court of England and Wales of the confidential version of Alstom’s reply of 30 June 2006 to the statement of objections in Case COMP/F/38.899 — Gas insulated switchgear.










2.


The application for interim measures is dismissed as to the remainder.










3.


The costs are reserved.
Case C-416/11 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 November 2012 — United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v European Commission (Appeal — Directive 92/43/EEC — Conservation of natural habitats — List of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region — Inclusion in the list of a site proposed by the Kingdom of Spain — Site allegedly covering an area of British Gibraltar territorial waters and an area of the high seas — Action for annulment — Measure merely confirmatory)
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Gibraltar, Mediterranean region (EU), Spain, environmental protection, international waters, territorial waters








C_2013026EN.01001301.xml










26.1.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/13





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 November 2012 — United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v European Commission
(Case C-416/11 P) (1)

(Appeal - Directive 92/43/EEC - Conservation of natural habitats - List of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region - Inclusion in the list of a site proposed by the Kingdom of Spain - Site allegedly covering an area of British Gibraltar territorial waters and an area of the high seas - Action for annulment - Measure merely confirmatory)
2013/C 26/22
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Ossowski, Agent, D. Wyatt QC and V. Wakefield, Barrister)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia and K. Mifsud Bonnici, Agents)

Intervener in support of the Commission: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: N. Díaz Abad and A. Rubio González, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 24 May 2011 in Case T-115/01 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v European Commission [2011] ECR II-0000, by which that court dismissed as inadmissible an action for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2010/45/EC of 22 December 2009 adopting, pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC, a third updated list of sites of Community importance for the Mediterranean biogeographical region [notified under number C(2009) 10406], to the extent that it retains on the list a site called ‘Estrecho Oriental’ (ES6120032), proposed by Spain, which includes an area of British Gibraltar territorial waters and an area of the high seas

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to pay the costs;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 298, 8.10.2011.
Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1j of Annex XV of the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation))
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Norway, State aid, applied research, common market, control of State aid, large business








C_2012369EN.01001001.xml










29.11.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 369/10





Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1j of Annex XV of the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation))
2012/C 369/09
PART I







Aid No


GBER 9/12/R&D




EFTA State


Norway




Granting authority


Name


Avinor AS




Address







Postboks 150




2061 Gardermoen




NORWAY








Webpage


http://www.avinor.no




Title of the aid measure


Research on remote & virtual tower technology




National legal basis (Reference to the relevant national official publication)


Contract




Web link to the full text of the aid measure


http://www.avinor.no/avinor/presse/_nyhetsarkiv?SAMARBEIDSAVTALE_MELLOM_AVINOR_OG_KONGSBERG&id=181-146949




 


Ad hoc aid


Name of the beneficiary: Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace AS




Date of granting


Ad hoc aid


21 June 2012




Type of beneficiary


SME


 




Large enterprises


X




Budget


Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme


NOK … million




Overall amount of the ad hoc aid awarded to the undertaking


MNOK 2,5




Aid instrument (Article 5)


Grant


MNOK 2




Other (please specify)


500 working hours at NOK 1 000 = NOK 500 000




PART II









General objectives (list)


Objectives (list)


Maximum aid intensity in % or Maximum aid amount in NOK


SME — bonuses in %




Aid for research, development and innovation
(Articles 30-37)


Aid for research and development projects
(Article 31)


Fundamental research
(Article 31(2)(a))


… %


 




Industrial research
(Article 31(2)(b))


50 %


 




Experimental development
(Article 31(2)(c))


… %
2012/754/EU: Decision of the European Central Bank of 29 November 2012 on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2013 (ECB/2012/26)
Date: 2012-11-29
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: euro, euro area, issuing of currency








L_2012334EN.01005001.xml










6.12.2012   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 334/50








            DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
         
of 29 November 2012
         
on the approval of the volume of coin issuance in 2013
(ECB/2012/26)
(2012/754/EU)


THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 128(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


The European Central Bank (ECB) has the exclusive right from 1 January 1999 to approve the volume of coins issued by the Member States whose currency is the euro.












(2)


The Member States whose currency is the euro have submitted to the ECB for approval their estimates of the volume of euro coins to be issued in 2013, supplemented by explanatory notes on the forecasting methodology,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1

Approval of the volume of euro coins to be issued in 2013

The ECB hereby approves the volume of euro coins to be issued by the Member States whose currency is the euro in 2013 as described in the following table:






(EUR million)




 


Issuance of coins intended for circulation and issuance of collector coins (not intended for circulation) in 2013




Belgium


149,9 




Germany


758,0 




Estonia


10,1 




Ireland


48,4 




Greece


8,9 




Spain


230,0 




France


300,0 




Italy


101,5 




Cyprus


7,1 




Luxembourg


40,0 




Malta


8,1 




Netherlands


63,8 




Austria


253,0 




Portugal


17,2 




Slovenia


15,0 




Slovakia


21,4 




Finland


60,0 






Article 2

Final provision

This Decision is addressed to the Member States whose currency is the euro.




Done at Frankfurt am Main, 29 November 2012.


The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI