do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-490/12: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Arnoldo Mondadori Editore v OHIM — Grazia Equity (GRAZIA) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark GRAZIA — Earlier national figurative mark GRAZIA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Lack of similarity between the goods — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Reputation — No link between the marks at issue)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2014395EN.01004102.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/41






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Arnoldo Mondadori Editore v OHIM — Grazia Equity (GRAZIA)
(Case T-490/12) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark GRAZIA - Earlier national figurative mark GRAZIA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Lack of similarity between the goods - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Reputation - No link between the marks at issue))
(2014/C 395/50)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: G. Dragotti, R. Valenti and S. Balice, lawyers)

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, intervening between the General Court: Grazia Equity GmbH (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: M. Müller, lawyer)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 September 2012 (Case R 1958/2010-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA and Grazia Equity GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.
Case T-266/13: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Brainlab v OHIM (Curve) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark Curve — Absolute ground for refusal — Trade mark contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality — Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, health care, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2014395EN.01004502.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/45






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Brainlab v OHIM (Curve)
(Case T-266/13) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark Curve - Absolute ground for refusal - Trade mark contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality - Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2014/C 395/56)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Brainlab AB (Feldkirchen, Germany) (represented by: J. Bauer, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 March 2013 (Case R 2073/2012-4), concerning an application for registration of the word mark Curve as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Brainlab AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 215, 27.7.2013.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7341 — MVD/Postcon/ADVO)  Text with EEA relevance
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, postal and telecommunications services








C_2014336EN.01000401.xml










26.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 336/4





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7341 — MVD/Postcon/ADVO)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2014/C 336/03)
On 19 September 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the German language 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/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7341. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-614/13: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Romonta v Commission (Environment — Directive 2003/87/EC — System of exchange of greenhouse gas emission allowances — Transitional rules concerning the free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances from 2013 — Decision 2011/278/EU — National implementing measures submitted by Germany — Hardship clause — Freedom to choose an occupation and to conduct a business — Property rights — Proportionality)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Germany, environmental protection, greenhouse gas, national implementing measure, ownership, principle of proportionality, right to work








C_2014395EN.01004701.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/47






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Romonta v Commission
(Case T-614/13) (1)

((Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - System of exchange of greenhouse gas emission allowances - Transitional rules concerning the free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances from 2013 - Decision 2011/278/EU - National implementing measures submitted by Germany - Hardship clause - Freedom to choose an occupation and to conduct a business - Property rights - Proportionality))
(2014/C 395/58)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Romonta GmbH (Seegebiet Mansfelder Land, Germany) (represented by: I. Zenke, M.-Y. Vollmer, C. Telschow and A. Schulze, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, C. Hermes and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 240, p. 27), in so far as Article 1(1) of that decision refuses to grant the applicant the supplementary quotas requested for the third trading period of the 2013 to 2020 emissions trading on the basis of the hardship clause under Paragraph 9(5) of the Treibhausgas-Emissionshandelsgesetz (German Law on greenhouse gas emissions trading) of 21 July 2011.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Romonta GmbH to pay the costs of the main proceedings and the interim proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 31, 1.2.2014.
Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 July 2014 to 31 July 2014 (Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: drug surveillance, market approval, marketing standard, medicinal product








C_2014337EN.01000101.xml










26.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 337/1





Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 July 2014 to 31 July 2014
(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) (1)

2014/C 337/01
—   Modification of a marketing authorisation (Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council): Accepted










Date of the decision


Name of the medicinal product


Holder of the marketing authorisation


Number of the entry in the Community Register


Date of notification




11.7.2014


Aclasta


Novartis Europharm Limited
Wimblehurst Road, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 5AB, United Kingdom


EU/1/05/308


20.8.2014




—   Withdrawal of a marketing authorisation (Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)









Date of the decision


Name of the medicinal product


Holder of the marketing authorisation


Number of the entry in the Community Register


Date of notification




18.7.2014


Revasc


Canyon Pharmaceuticals Ltd
7th Floor, 52-54 Gracechurch Street, London EC3V 0EH, United Kingdom


EU/1/97/043


22.8.2014




—   Issuing of a marketing authorisation (Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2)): Accepted













Date of the decision


Name of the medicinal product


INN (International Non-Proprietary Name)


Holder of the marketing authorisation


Number of the entry in the Community Register


Pharmaceutical form


ATC code (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Code)


Date of notification




31.7.2014


Versican Plus Pi/L4R


Canine parainfluenza type 2 virus
Leptospira interrogans serogroup Icterohaemorrhagiae, serovar Icterohaemorrhagiae strain MSLB 1089
Leptospira interrogans serogroup Canicola, serovar Canicola, strain MSLB 1090
Leptospira kirschneri serogroup Grippotyphosa, serovar Grippotyphosa, strain MSLB 1091
Leptospira interrogans serogroup Australis, serovar Bratislava, strain MSLB 1088
Inactivated rabies virus, strain SAD Vnukovo-32


Zoetis Belgium S.A.
Rue Laid Burniat 1, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique


EU/2/14/173


Lyophilisate and solvent for suspension for injection


QI07AJ


4.8.2014




Anyone wishing to consult the public assessment report on the medicinal products in question and the decisions relating thereto is invited to contact:





The European Medicines Agency




30, Churchill Place, Canary Wharf




UK — LONDON E14 5EU






(1)  OJ L 136, 30.4.04, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 136, 30.4.04, p. 1.
Case C-451/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Sofia (Municipal Court Sofia) (Bulgaria) lodged on 26 September 2014 — Rumyana Asenova Petrus v Republic of Bulgaria
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bulgaria, interpretation of the law, jurisdiction ratione materiae








C_2015138EN.01002402.xml










27.4.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/24





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Sofia (Municipal Court Sofia) (Bulgaria) lodged on 26 September 2014 — Rumyana Asenova Petrus v Republic of Bulgaria
(Case C-451/14)
(2015/C 138/33)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Rayonen sad Sofia

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Rumyana Asenova Petrus

Defendant: Republic of Bulgaria
By order of 5 February 2015, the Court ruled that it manifestly lacked jurisdiction to answer the question referred by the Rayonen sad Sofia (Bulgaria)
Case T-695/14: Action brought on 26 September 2014  — Omega v OHIM (Representation of a picture in black and white)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, designs and models, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2014409EN.01005701.xml










17.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 409/57





Action brought on 26 September 2014 — Omega v OHIM (Representation of a picture in black and white)
(Case T-695/14)
2014/C 409/78
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Omega International GmbH (Bad Oldesloe, Germany) (represented by J. Becker, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 July 2014 in Case R 1037/2014-5 and register the mark as a trade mark under application No 1 2 1 74  215;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark representing a picture in black and white for goods and services in Classes 3, 5, 32 and 33 — Community trade mark application No 1 2 1 74  215

Decision of the Examiner: the application was rejected

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed

Pleas in law: The sign is capable of identifying the goods to consumers with an average degree of interest.
Case T-629/13: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Molda v Commission (Environment — Directive 2003/87/EC — Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 — Decision 2011/278/EU — National implementation measures presented by Germany — Clause relating to extremely difficult cases — Freedom to a professional activity and to conduct a business — Right to property — Proportionality)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Germany, environmental protection, greenhouse gas, national implementing measure, ownership, principle of proportionality, right to work








C_2014395EN.01004702.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/47






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Molda v Commission
(Case T-629/13) (1)

((Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 - Decision 2011/278/EU - National implementation measures presented by Germany - Clause relating to extremely difficult cases - Freedom to a professional activity and to conduct a business - Right to property - Proportionality))
(2014/C 395/59)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Molda AG (Dahlenburg, Germany) (represented by: I. Zenke, M. Y. Vollmer, C. Telschow and A. Schulze, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, C. Hermes and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 240, p. 27) in so far as Article 1(1) thereof rejects granting the applicant the supplementary quotas requested for the third trading period of the 2013 to 2020 emissions trading on the basis of the hardship clause under Paragraph 9(5) of the Treibhausgas-Emissionshandelsgesetz (German Law on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading) of 21 July 2011.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Molda AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 31, 1.2.2014.
Case T-634/13: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Arctic Paper Mochenwangen v Commission (Environment — Directive 2003/87/EC — Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Transitional rules concerning the harmonised allocation of emission allowances free of charge as from 2013 — Decision 2011/278/EU — National implementation measures submitted by Germany — Clause on cases with undue hardship — Freedom to conduct a business — Right to property — Proportionality)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Germany, environmental protection, greenhouse gas, ownership, principle of proportionality, right to work








C_2014395EN.01004902.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/49






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Arctic Paper Mochenwangen v Commission
(Case T-634/13) (1)

((Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Transitional rules concerning the harmonised allocation of emission allowances free of charge as from 2013 - Decision 2011/278/EU - National implementation measures submitted by Germany - Clause on cases with undue hardship - Freedom to conduct a business - Right to property - Proportionality))
(2014/C 395/62)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Arctic Paper Mochenwangen GmbH (Wolpertswende, Germany) (represented by: S. Kobes, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, C. Hermes and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Re:

Application to annul Article 1(1) of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 240, p. 27), in so far as it rejects the inscription of the installation with identification code DE000000000000563 on the list of installations provided for in Article 11(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32), and the preliminary total annual amounts of emission allowances allocated free of charge to that installation.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Arctic Paper Mochenwangen GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 31, 1.2.2014.
Case T-631/13: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Raffinerie Heide v Commission (Environment — Directive 2003/87/EC — Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 — Decision 2011/278/EU — National implementation measures presented by Germany — Clause relating to extremely difficult cases — Freedom to conduct a business — Right to property — Proportionality)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Germany, environmental protection, greenhouse gas, ownership, principle of proportionality, right to work








C_2014395EN.01004901.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/49






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Raffinerie Heide v Commission
(Case T-631/13) (1)

((Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances from 2013 - Decision 2011/278/EU - National implementation measures presented by Germany - Clause relating to extremely difficult cases - Freedom to conduct a business - Right to property - Proportionality))
(2014/C 395/61)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Raffinerie Heide GmbH (Hemmingstedt, Germany) (represented by: U. Karpenstein, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. White, C. Hermes and K. Herrmann, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2013/448/EU of 5 September 2013 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2013 L 240, p. 27) in so far as Article 1(1) thereof, read in conjunction with Annex I, Point A thereto, rejects the inscription of the installation with the identification code DE000000000000010 on the list of installations provided for in Article 11(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32), and the preliminary total annual amounts of emission allowances to be allocated for free to that installation

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Raffinerie Heide GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 31, 1.2.2014.
Joined Cases T-91/12 and T-280/12: Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Flying Holding and Others v Commission (Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Provision of non-scheduled passenger transport services by air and chartered air-taxi service — Rejection of the application — Article 94(b) of the Financial Regulation — Rights of the defence — Article 134(5) of the Regulation implementing the Financial Regulation — Action for annulment — Letter in response to a question from the applicants — Act not amenable to review — Award decision — Lack of direct concern — Inadmissible — Non-contractual liability)
Date: 2014-09-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: air transport, award of contract, carriage of passengers, contractual liability, damages, indemnification, invitation to tender, services contract








C_2014395EN.01003501.xml










10.11.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 395/35






Judgment of the General Court of 26 September 2014 — Flying Holding and Others v Commission
(Joined Cases T-91/12 and T-280/12) (1)

((Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Provision of non-scheduled passenger transport services by air and chartered air-taxi service - Rejection of the application - Article 94(b) of the Financial Regulation - Rights of the defence - Article 134(5) of the Regulation implementing the Financial Regulation - Action for annulment - Letter in response to a question from the applicants - Act not amenable to review - Award decision - Lack of direct concern - Inadmissible - Non-contractual liability))
(2014/C 395/41)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Flying Holding NV (Wilrijk, Belgium), Flying Group Lux SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg), and Flying Service NV (Deurne, Belgium) (represented by: C. Doutrelepont and V. Chapoulaud, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially by S. Delaude and D. Calciu, acting as Agents, and subsequently by S. Delaude, assisted by V. Vanden Acker, lawyer)

Re:

Action for annulment of (i) the decisions contained in the letters from the Commission of 15 December 2011 and 17 January 2012 rejecting the application submitted by the applicants in the context of a restricted tendering procedure concerning the provision of non-scheduled passenger transport services by air and chartered air-taxi service (OJ 2011/S 192-312059) and (ii) the Commission’s decision of 28 February 2012 awarding the contract to another company, on the one hand, and a claim for damages on the other.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the actions;










2.


Orders Flying Holding NV, Flying Group Lux SA and Flying Service NV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.