do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-239/15: Action brought on 15 May 2015 — Cryo-Save v OHIM — MedSkin Solutions Dr. Suwelack (Cryo-Save)
Date: 2015-05-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, blood transfusion, registered trade mark, stem cell, trade-mark law








C_2015236EN.01004401.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/44





Action brought on 15 May 2015 — Cryo-Save v OHIM — MedSkin Solutions Dr. Suwelack (Cryo-Save)
(Case T-239/15)
(2015/C 236/59)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Cryo-Save AG (Freienbach, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: MedSkin Solutions Dr. Suwelack AG (Billerbeck, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘Cryo-Save’ — Community trade mark No 4 625 216

Procedure before OHIM: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 March 2015 in Case R 2567/2013-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


alter the contested decision to the effect that the decision of the Cancellation Division of 30 October 2013 is annulled and the application for revocation of Community trade mark No 4 625 216 is rejected;
in the alternative: annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 56(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Rule 37(b)(iv) of Regulation No 2868/95;










—


Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-263/15: Action brought on 15 May 2015 — Gmina Miasto Gdynia and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo v Commission
Date: 2015-05-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Pomerania, State aid, airport, civil aviation, control of State aid, redevelopment aid








C_2015254EN.01001602.xml










3.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 254/16





Action brought on 15 May 2015 — Gmina Miasto Gdynia and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo v Commission
(Case T-263/15)
(2015/C 254/20)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicants: Gmina Miasto Gdynia (Gdynia, Poland) and Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo sp. z o. o. (Gdynia, Poland) (represented by: T. Koncewicz, K. Gruszecka-Spychała and M. Le Berre, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


annul and set aside in its entirety the decision of the European Commission of 26 February 2015 on measure SA.35388 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN and ex 2012/N), Poland, ‘Setting up of Gdynia-Kosakowo Airport’;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies inter alia on the following pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law:






—


Arbitrariness and manifest error in determining the facts taken as the basis for making the contested decision, and consequently exceeding by the Commission of the bounds of its discretion and committing manifest errors in the assessment of the evidence.














2.


Second plea in law:






—


Failure of the Commission to consider the relevant factors and circumstances for the legal assessment of the investments in Port Lotniczy Gdynia Kosakowo.














3.


Third plea in law:






—


Exceeding by the Commission of the bounds of its discretion within the meaning of the case-law emphasising the obligations of the institution exercising discretion to explain both why certain items of evidence and facts are taken into consideration and why others are rejected.














4.


Fourth plea in law:






—


Breach of Article 107(1) TFEU in conjunction with a general principle of European law — the principle of legal certainty and good faith of the institution towards subjects of law, by its erroneous application and interpretation.














5.


Fifth plea in law:






—


Infringement in the erroneous legal categorisation of facts and evidence, resulting in a breach by the contested decision of Article 107(1) TFEU, in finding that the conditions were not fulfilled in this case for regarding the operations at issue as satisfying the private investor test and that it had not been shown that the investment project would be carried out by a private investor, and consequently finding that the Gdynia Kosakowo investment was unauthorised public aid.
Case C-225/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Reggio Calabria (Italy) lodged on 15 May 2015 — Criminal proceedings against Domenico POLITANO’
Date: 2015-05-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, game of chance, national law, service concession, tendering








C_2015262EN.01000601.xml










10.8.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 262/6





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Reggio Calabria (Italy) lodged on 15 May 2015 — Criminal proceedings against Domenico POLITANO’
(Case C-225/15)
(2015/C 262/08)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Reggio Calabria

Party to the main proceedings

Domenico POLITANO’

Questions referred







1)


Must Article 49 TFEU, as well as the principles of equal treatment and effectiveness, be interpreted as precluding national legislation in the field of betting and gambling which provides for the organisation of a fresh call for tenders (as governed by Article [10(9)g] of Law No 44 of 26 April 2012) for the award of licences that includes clauses excluding from the tendering procedure undertakings which have failed to meet the condition relating to economic and financial standing, as a result of the failure to provide for criteria other than the requirement of two bank references from two separate banks?










2)


Must Article 47 of Directive 2004/18/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 be interpreted as precluding national legislation in the field of betting and gambling which provides for the organisation of a fresh call for tenders (as governed by Article [10(9)g] of Law No 44 of 26 April 2012) for the award of licences [that includes clauses excluding from the tendering procedure undertakings which have failed to meet the condition] relating to economic and financial standing, as a result of the failure to provide for alternative documentation and options, as laid down under [EU] legislation?






(1)  Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).
Case F-76/15: Action brought on 15 May 2015 — ZZ v Council
Date: 2015-05-15
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European official, child, dependant, health expenditure, illness








C_2015245EN.01005101.xml










27.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 245/51





Action brought on 15 May 2015 — ZZ v Council
(Case F-76/15)
(2015/C 245/64)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of the Brussels Settlements Office rejecting the application for extension of the recognition of the illness suffered by the applicant’s son as a serious illness and for the medical expenses connected therewith to be reimbursed at 100 %.

Form of order sought







—


Annul the decision of the Brussels Settlements Office of 8 April 2014 rejecting the application for extension of the recognition of the illness suffered by the applicant’s son as a serious illness and for the medical expenses connected therewith to be reimbursed at 100 %;










—


Order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.
Case T-237/15: Action brought on 15 May 2015 — Łabowicz v. OHIM — Pure Fishing (NANO)
Date: 2015-05-15
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fishing industry, recreational fishing, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015228EN.01002201.xml










13.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 228/22





Action brought on 15 May 2015 — Łabowicz v. OHIM — Pure Fishing (NANO)
(Case T-237/15)
(2015/C 228/27)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Edward Łabowicz (Kłodzko, Poland) (represented by: M. Żygadło, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pure Fishing, Inc. (Spirit Lake, United States)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘NANO’– Community trade mark No 6 649 818

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 March 2015 in Case R 2426/2013-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs.





Pleas in law







—


Misinterpretation and misapplication of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Articles 76 and 83 of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Breach of Articles 6 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning, respectively, the right to a fair trial and the prohibition of discrimination.