do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-608/12 P: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 May 2014  — Greinwald GmbH v Nicolas Wessang, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Article 169(2) of those rules — Content required in the application initiating an appeal)
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, food industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014261EN.01000301.xml










11.8.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 261/3





Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 May 2014 — Greinwald GmbH v Nicolas Wessang, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-608/12 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Article 169(2) of those rules - Content required in the application initiating an appeal))
2014/C 261/03
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Greinwald GmbH (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)

Other parties to the proceedings: Nicolas Wessang (represented by: A. Grolée, lawyer), Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the order







1.


The main appeal and the cross-appeal are dismissed.










2.


Greinwald GmbH is ordered to pay the costs of the main appeal.










3.


Nicolas Wessang is ordered to pay the costs of the cross-appeal.






(1)  OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7223 — Danish Crown/Sokolow) — Candidate case for simplified procedure  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Denmark, Poland, economic concentration, live animal, meat processing industry, merger control








C_2014138EN.01004401.xml










8.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/44





Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.7223 — Danish Crown/Sokolow)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 138/11)






1.


On 30 April 2014, the European Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Danish Crown A/S (‘Danish Crown’, Denmark) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the undertaking Sokolów SA (‘Sokolów’, Poland) by way of purchase of shares. Sokolów is currently jointly controlled by Danish Crown and the Finnish food company HKScan OYJ.










2.


The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
—   for Danish Crown: vertically integrated food company which supplies live animals, including pigs and cattle, to slaughterhouses. Danish Crown is based in Denmark but has production facilities in several countries and activities worldwide,
—   for Sokolów: vertically integrated food company which is active in the slaughtering of live animals, including pigs and cattle, and in the processing of meat, including pig, beef and poultry. Sokolów has production facilities in Poland.










3.


On preliminary examination, the European Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the 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 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.










4.


The European Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the European Commission.
Observations must reach the European Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the European Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7223 — Danish Crown/Sokolow to the following address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË










(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-337/14: Action brought on 8 May 2014  — Rezon OOD v OHIM — mobile.international GmbH (mobile.de proMotor)
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014245EN.01002401.xml










28.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/24





Action brought on 8 May 2014 — Rezon OOD v OHIM — mobile.international GmbH (mobile.de proMotor)
(Case T-337/14)
2014/C 245/32
Language in which the application was lodged: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: Rezon OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: P. Kanchev and T. Ignatova, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: mobile.international GmbH (Dreilinden, Germany)

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 19 February 2014 in Case R 950/2013-1;










—


grant the applications made to the divisions and boards of appeal of OHIM;










—


grant in its entirety the application for a declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark mobile.international GmbH;










—


order reimbursement of the applicant’s costs;










—


order that experts be appointed to produce a written report on the evidential issues raised in the action.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Word mark ‘mobile.de proMotor’ for services in classes 35, 38, 41 and 42 — Community trade mark registration No 4 896 643.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant, Rezon OOD.

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Relative ground for invalidity under Article 53(1) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Application dismissed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 78(1)(e) of Regulation No 207/2009, in conjunction with Article 76 thereof and with Rule 22(3) of Regulation No 2868/95; infringement of Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009; conflict, in the light of EU enlargement, between the Community trade mark registered subsequently and an earlier national trade mark.
Case T-575/12: Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014  — Pyrox v OHIM — Köb Holzheizsysteme (PYROX) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for figurative Community trade mark PYROX — Earlier national word marks PYROT — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fuel, lubricants, machine-tool industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014194EN.01002301.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/23





Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014 — Pyrox v OHIM — Köb Holzheizsysteme (PYROX)
(Case T-575/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative Community trade mark PYROX - Earlier national word marks PYROT - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2014/C 194/29
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Pyrox GmbH (Oberhausen, Germany) (represented by: T. Eigen, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Köb Holzheizsysteme GmbH (Wolfurt, Austria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 October 2012 (Joined Cases R 2187/2011-1 and R 2507/2011-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Köb Holzheizsysteme GmbH and Pyrox GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Pyrox GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 55, 23.2.2013.
Case T-326/14: Action brought on 8 May 2014 — Novomatic v OHIM — Granini France (HOT JOKER)
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, game of chance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014245EN.01002301.xml










28.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/23





Action brought on 8 May 2014 — Novomatic v OHIM — Granini France (HOT JOKER)
(Case T-326/14)
2014/C 245/31
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Novomatic AG (Gumpoldskirchen, Austria) (represented by: W. M. Mosing, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Granini France (Macon, France)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 6 February 2014 in Case R 589/2013-2, with the consequence that the opposition is rejected and the Community trade mark No 9 594 458 is registered as applied for;










—


order that the defendant and — in case it intervenes in writing — the other party to the proceedings with OHIM have to bear their own costs and have to compensate the costs incurred by the Plaintiff in the proceeding in front of the General Court and in the appeal proceeding with OHIM





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark containing the word elements ‘HOT JOKER’ for goods in Classes 9 and 28 — Community trade mark application No 9 594 458

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Granini France

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The figurative mark containing the word elements ‘joker +’ for goods in Classes 28 and 41

Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was rejected

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009; infringement of Article 75 ff. of Regulation No 207/2009; infringement of OHIM’s duty to exercise its powers in accordance with the general principles of European Union Law.
Case C-226/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 8 May 2014  — Eurogate Distribution GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Stadt
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, accounting, customs debt, customs warehouse, import (EU), tax collection








C_2014303EN.01000601.xml










8.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/6





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 8 May 2014 — Eurogate Distribution GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Stadt
(Case C-226/14)
2014/C 303/08
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Eurogate Distribution GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Stadt

Questions referred







–


Question 1: Is it inconsistent with the provisions of Directive 77/388/EEC (1) to levy import turnover tax for goods which have been reexported as non-Community goods for which, however, a customs debt is incurred due to a breach of obligation under Article 204 of the Customs Code (2) — in this case: delay in the fulfilment of the obligation to record the removal of the goods from a customs warehouse in the appropriate stock records, at the latest at the time of their removal?
In the event that Question 1 is answered in the negative:










–


Question 2: Do the provisions of Directive 77/388/EEC require the levy of import turnover tax for the goods in such cases or do Member States have a margin of discretion in this respect?
and










–


Question 3: Is a customs warehouse maintainer who, on the basis of a relationship involving the provision of services, stores a good from a third country in his customs warehouse without having that good at his disposal liable to pay import VAT, which is incurred as a result of his breach of obligation under the second subparagraph of Article 10(3) of Directive 77/388/EEC in conjunction with Article 204(1) of the Customs Code, even if the good is not used for the purposes of his taxable transactions within the meaning of Article 17(2)(a) of Directive 77/388/EEC?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.

(2)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1.
Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1j of Annex XV to 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: 2014-05-08
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Norway, State aid, aid to undertakings, care of people with disabilities, common market, control of State aid, employment aid, integration of people with disabilities, job access, small and medium-sized enterprises








C_2014138EN.01002601.xml










8.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/26





Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1j of Annex XV to 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)
(2014/C 138/04)
PART I







Aid reference


GBER 1/14/EMP




EFTA State


Norway




Granting authority


Name


Arbeids- og velferdsetaten (The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration)




 


Address







PO Box 5 St. Olavs plass




NO-0130 Oslo




Norway








 


Webpage


www.nav.no




Title of the aid measure


Disability assistance in working life
(Funksjonsassistanse i arbeidslivet)




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


Forskrift 11. desember 2008 nr. 1320 om arbeidsrettede tiltak mv.
(Reg. 1320/2008)




Web link to the full text of the aid measure


http://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2008-12-11-1320




Type of measure


Scheme


X




Amendment of an existing aid measure


GBER 6/12/EMP


EFTA Surveillance Authority aid number




 


Prolongation


X




Duration


Scheme


Unlimited




Economic sector(s) concerned


All economic sectors eligible to receive aid


X




Type of beneficiary


SME


X




 


Large enterprises


X




Budget


Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme


Approx. NOK 36 millions




Aid instrument
(Article 5)


Grant


X




PART II








General Objectives (list)


Objectives (list)


Maximum aid intensity in % or Maximum aid amount in NOK


SME
– bonuses in %




Aid for disadvantaged and disabled workers
(Articles 40-42)


Aid for the recruitment of disadvantaged workers in the form of wage subsidies
(Article 40)


…%


 




 


Aid for the employment of disabled workers in the form of wage subsidies
(Article 41)


…%


 




 


Aid for compensating the additional costs of employing disabled workers
(Article 42)


Documented additional costs for the assistant, for one year at the time
Case T-38/13: Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014  — Pedro Group v OHIM — Cortefiel (PEDRO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark PEDRO — Earlier Community figurative mark Pedro del Hierro — Partial refusal to register — Relative grounds for refusal — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Highly distinctive character of the earlier mark — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU trade mark, Romania, Spain, clothing industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014194EN.01002302.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/23





Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014 — Pedro Group v OHIM — Cortefiel (PEDRO)
(Case T-38/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark PEDRO - Earlier Community figurative mark Pedro del Hierro - Partial refusal to register - Relative grounds for refusal - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Highly distinctive character of the earlier mark - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2014/C 194/30
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Pedro Group Pte Ltd (Singapore, Singapore) (represented by: B. Brandreth, Barrister)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: M. Vuijst and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Cortefiel, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented initially by H. Mosback, P. López Ronda, G. Macias Bonilla and G. Marín Raigal, and subsequently by P. López Ronda, G. Macias Bonilla and G. Marín Raigal, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 November 2012 (Case R 271/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Cortefiel, SA, and Pedro Group Pte Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Pedro Group Pte Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 101, 6.4.2013.
State aid — Decision to raise no objections
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: Norway, State aid, bioenergy, control of State aid, energy industry, energy saving, environmental protection, national budget, renewable energy








C_2014138EN.01002801.xml










8.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/28





State aid — Decision to raise no objections
(2014/C 138/05)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:








Date of adoption of the decision



:


12 February 2014





Case number



:


74910





Decision number



:


56/14/COL





EFTA State



:


Norway





Title



:


A prolongation and a budget increase of the Norwegian Bioenergy Scheme





Legal basis



:


Annual Agricultural Agreement and state budget approved by the Norwegian Parliament for 2014





Objective



:


Environmental protection; Increasing supply of renewable energy for heating, and contributing to energy saving





Form of aid



:


Grants





Budget



:


NOK 60 million (Annual budget subject to parliamentary budget procedures)





Duration



:


2014 (until expiry of the current Environmental Guidelines)





Economic sectors



:


Energy





Name and address of the granting authority



:







Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries




PO Box 8090 Dep




NO-0032 Oslo




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 C-225/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d’instance de Dieppe (France) lodged on 8 May 2014  — Facet SA v Jean Henri
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer credit, consumer information, provision of documents, unfair terms of contract








C_2014223EN.01000901.xml










14.7.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 223/9





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d’instance de Dieppe (France) lodged on 8 May 2014 — Facet SA v Jean Henri
(Case C-225/14)
2014/C 223/13
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal d’instance de Dieppe

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Facet SA

Defendant: Jean Henri

Questions referred







1.


Does Article 22 of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers, (1) interpreted in the light of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, (2) prohibit the existence and application of standard terms in credit agreements whereby the consumer acknowledges that the creditor’s obligations have been fulfilled?










2.


Do the general principle of the effectiveness of Community law and Article 22 of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers, interpreted in the light of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993, preclude the creditor’s being able to establish proof of fulfilment of its pre-contractual and contractual obligations solely by means of the standard terms in credit agreements whereby the consumer acknowledges that those obligations have been fulfilled, without producing before the court the documents issued by the creditor and supplied to the borrower?






(1)  Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66).

(2)  OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.
Case T-327/12: Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014  — Simca Europe v OHIM — PSA Peugeot Citroën (Simca) (Community trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Community word mark Simca — Bad faith — Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-05-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014194EN.01002201.xml










24.6.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/22





Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014 — Simca Europe v OHIM — PSA Peugeot Citroën (Simca)
(Case T-327/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark Simca - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2014/C 194/28
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Simca Europe Ltd (Birmingham, United Kingdom) (represented by: N. Haberkamm, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: GIE PSA Peugeot Citroën (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Kotsch, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 April 2012 (Case R 645/2011-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between GIE PSA Peugeot Citroën and Simca Europe Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Dismisses the action;










2)


Orders Simca Europe Ltd to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.