do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-550/14: Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2015 — Volkswagen v OHIM (COMPETITION) (Community trade mark — Application for the Community word mark COMPETITION — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015363EN.01003802.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/38





Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2015 — Volkswagen v OHIM (COMPETITION)
(Case T-550/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark COMPETITION - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 363/47)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: U. Sander, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 May 2014 (Case R 2082/2013-1) concerning an application for registration of the word sign COMPETITION as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Volkswagen AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 22.9.2014.
Case T-539/15: Action brought on 17 September 2015 — LLR-G5 v OHIM — Glycan Finance (SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015381EN.01005001.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/50





Action brought on 17 September 2015 — LLR-G5 v OHIM — Glycan Finance (SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5)
(Case T-539/15)
(2015/C 381/61)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: LLR-G5 Ltd (Castlebar, Ireland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Glycan Finance Corp. Ltd (Sheffield, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark in colour containing the word elements ‘SILICIUM ORGANIQUE G5 LLR-G5’ — Community trade mark application No 10 424 703

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2015 in Case R 291/2014-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision to the extent that it dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division of 27 November 2013 in case B 2 027 053, and to the extent that it granted the other party’s appeal against the same decision of the Opposition Division;










—


the opposition of the other party to the registration of the applicant’s community trade mark application No. 1 042 4703 is dismissed;










—


order OHIM and the other party, if it should intervene in these proceedings, to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-538/15: Action brought on 17 September 2015 — Regent University v OHIM — Regent’s College (REGENT UNIVERSITY)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, university








C_2015371EN.01004201.xml










9.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 371/42





Action brought on 17 September 2015 — Regent University v OHIM — Regent’s College (REGENT UNIVERSITY)
(Case T-538/15)
(2015/C 371/43)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Regent University (Virginia Beach, United States) (represented by: D. Wilkinson, Solicitor and E. Himsworth, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Regent’s College (London, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘REGENT UNIVERSITY’ — Community trade mark registration No 4 711 594

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 July 2015 in Case R 1859/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


remit the matter for further consideration by the Board;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs incurred by the applicant before the Board;










—


order the cancellation applicant to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs incurred by the applicant before the Board, in the event that the cancellation applicant becomes an intervening party in these proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringements of Article 53(1) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7730 — Groupe Acticall/Sitel Worldwide Corporation) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consultancy, customers, economic concentration, merger control, outsourcing, provision of services, telecommunications industry








C_2015306EN.01000301.xml










17.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 306/3





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7730 — Groupe Acticall/Sitel Worldwide Corporation)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 306/05)
On 9 September 2015, 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 English 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 32015M7730. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-323/14: Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2015 — Bankia v OHIM — Banco ActivoBank (Portugal) (Bankia) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark Bankia — Earlier national word mark BANKY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, financial institution, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015363EN.01003801.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/38





Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2015 — Bankia v OHIM — Banco ActivoBank (Portugal) (Bankia)
(Case T-323/14) (1)

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Bankia - Earlier national word mark BANKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 363/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Bankia, SA (Valencia, Spain) (represented by: F. De Barba, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Banco ActivoBank (Portugal), SA (Lisbon, Portugal)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 February 2014 (Joined Cases R 649/2013-2 and R 744/2013-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Banco ActivoBank (Portugal), SA, and Bankia, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 14 February 2014 (Joined Cases R 649/2013-2 and R 744/2013-2) to the extent that it upheld the appeal of Banco ActivoBank (Portugal), SA, concerning the ‘real estate services’ covered by the Community trade mark application in Class 36;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders Bankia, SA, and OHIM to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 261, 11.8.2014.
Case T-541/15: Action brought on 17 September 2015 — Industrie Aeronautiche Reggiane v OHIM — Audi (NSU)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, two-wheeled vehicle








C_2015381EN.01005101.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/51





Action brought on 17 September 2015 — Industrie Aeronautiche Reggiane v OHIM — Audi (NSU)
(Case T-541/15)
(2015/C 381/62)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Industrie Aeronautiche Reggiane Srl (Reggio Emilia, Italy) (represented by: M. Gurrado, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Audi AG (Ingolstadt, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Applicant: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘NSU’ — Application for registration No 9 593 492

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 July 2015 in Case R 2132/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and, as a result, the OHIM shall proceed with the registration of the application for CTM;










—


order AUDI to bear its own costs and pay those of the Applicant, also for the proceedings before the OHIM Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Audi failed to demonstrate genuine use of the earlier mark;










—


Existence of a difference between components and finished products;










—


Existence of a difference between bicycles and the goods indicated in the request of limitation dated 16 October 2014.
Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Banking Authority (EBA) for the financial year 2015 — amending budget No 1
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: European Banking Authority
Subjects: EU expenditure, EU office or agency, amending budget, banking, budgetary resources, publication of accounts








C_2015307EN.01002701.xml










17.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 307/27





Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Banking Authority (EBA) for the financial year 2015 — amending budget No 1
(2015/C 307/08)

REVENUE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Budget 2015


Amending budget No 1


New amount





1






CONTRIBUTION FROM NATIONAL SUPERVISORY AUTHORITIES





1 0


CONTRIBUTION FROM NATIONAL SUPERVISORY AUTHORITIES


18 386 651


1 110 844


19 497 495




 



Title 1 — Total




18 386 651




1 110 844




19 497 495






2






EUROPEAN UNION CONTRIBUTION





2 0


EUROPEAN UNION CONTRIBUTION


12 606 000


761 600


13 367 600




 



Title 2 — Total




12 606 000




761 600




13 367 600






4






CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OBSERVERS





4 0


CONTRIBUTIONS FROM OBSERVERS


522 349


31 556


553 905




 



Title 4 — Total




522 349




31 556




553 905






9






MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES





9 0


MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES


—


 


—




 



Title 9 — Total




—



 



—





 



GRAND TOTAL




31 515 000




1 904 000




33 419 000






EXPENDITURE










Title
Chapter


Heading


Appropriations 2015


Amending budget No 1


New amount





1






STAFF EXPENDITURE





1 1


STAFF IN ACTIVE EMPLOYMENT


20 244 400


1 554 000


21 798 400




1 2


EXPENDITURE RELATING TO STAFF MANAGEMENT AND RECRUITMENT


1 243 500


63 000


1 306 500




1 3


MISSIONS EXPENSES, TRAVEL AND INCIDENTAL EXPENSES


40 000


 


40 000




1 4


SOCIOMEDICAL INFRASTRUCTURE


30 400


 


30 400




1 5


TRAINING


140 000


 


140 000




1 7


REPRESENTATION EXPENSES, RECEPTIONS AND EVENTS


22 500


 


22 500




 



Title 1 — Total




21 720 800




1 617 000




23 337 800






2






INFRASTRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE





2 0


RENTAL OF BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED COSTS


2 291 800


214 000


2 505 800




2 1


INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY


1 460 300


 


1 460 300




2 2


MOVABLE PROPERTY AND ASSOCIATED COSTS


—


 


—




2 3


CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE


138 000


8 000


146 000




2 4


POSTAGE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS


212 500


18 000


230 500




2 5


INFORMATION AND PUBLISHING


280 000


22 000


302 000




2 6


MEETING EXPENSES


10 000


 


10 000




 



Title 2 — Total




4 392 600




262 000




4 654 600






3






OPERATING EXPENDITURES





3 1


GENERAL OPERATIONAL COSTS: SEMINARS FOR NSA, MEETINGS, MISSIONS, CONSULTATION SERVICES AND PUBLICATION


2 023 500


25 000


2 048 500




3 2


COLLECTION OF INFORMATION: DEVELOPING AND MAINTENANCE OF A CENTRAL EUROPEAN DATABASE


3 378 100


 


3 378 100




3 3


IT SOLUTIONS ASSESSMENT


—


 


—




 



Title 3 — Total




5 401 600




25 000




5 426 600





 



GRAND TOTAL




31 515 000




1 904 000




33 419 000
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7663 — DTZ/Cushman & Wakefield) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, provision of services, real estate business








C_2015306EN.01000101.xml










17.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 306/1





Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.7663 — DTZ/Cushman & Wakefield)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2015/C 306/01)
On 27 August 2015, 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 English 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 32015M7663. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-33/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 September 2015 — Mory SA, in liquidation, Mory Team, in liquidation, Superga Invest v European Commission (Appeal — State aid — Actions for annulment — Article 263 TFEU — Admissibility — Unlawful and incompatible aid — Obligation to recover — European Commission decision not to extend the recovery obligation to the successor of the aid beneficiary — Interest in bringing proceedings — Action for damages and for the recovery of aid before the national courts — Locus standi — Appellant not individually concerned)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: France, State aid, aid recipient, control of State aid, damages, liquidation, ownership, reimbursement of aid








C_2015371EN.01000701.xml










9.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 371/7





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 September 2015 — Mory SA, in liquidation, Mory Team, in liquidation, Superga Invest v European Commission
(Case C-33/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - State aid - Actions for annulment - Article 263 TFEU - Admissibility - Unlawful and incompatible aid - Obligation to recover - European Commission decision not to extend the recovery obligation to the successor of the aid beneficiary - Interest in bringing proceedings - Action for damages and for the recovery of aid before the national courts - Locus standi - Appellant not individually concerned))
(2015/C 371/09)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellants: Mory SA, in liquidation, Mory Team, in liquidation, Superga Invest (represented by: B. Vatier and F. Loubières, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Sets aside the Order of the General Court of the European Union in Mory and Others v Commission (T-545/12, EU:T:2013:607);










2)


Dismisses as inadmissible the action for annulment brought by Mory SA, Mory Team and Superga Invest against Decision C(2012) 2401 final of the Commission of 4 April 2012 concerning the takeover of assets of the Sernam group as part of its composition with creditors;










3)


Orders Mory SA, Mory Team, Superga Invest and the European Commission to bear their own costs relating both to the proceedings at first instance and to the appeal.






(1)  OJ C 102, 7.4.2014.
Case T-691/13: Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2015 — Ricoh Belgium v Council (Public service and supply contracts — Tender procedure — Black and white multifunction printers and maintenance services — Rejection of the bid made by a tenderer — Obligation to state reasons — Transparency)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: invitation to tender, printer, services contract, tendering, transparency in decision-making








C_2015363EN.01003401.xml










3.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 363/34





Judgment of the General Court of 17 September 2015 — Ricoh Belgium v Council
(Case T-691/13) (1)

((Public service and supply contracts - Tender procedure - Black and white multifunction printers and maintenance services - Rejection of the bid made by a tenderer - Obligation to state reasons - Transparency))
(2015/C 363/42)
Language of the case: Dutch

Parties


Applicant: Ricoh Belgium NV (Vilvoorde, Belgium) (represented by: N. Braeckevelt and A. De Visscher, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Vitsentzatos and K. Michoel, acting as Agents, and B. Van Vooren and J. Weytjens, lawyers)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the Council of 29 October 2013 not to accept the tender submitted by the applicant in tendering procedure UCA 034/13, relating to the purchase or hire of black and white multifunction printers (MFPs) and associated maintenance services in the buildings occupied by the General Secretariat of the Council (OJ 2013/S 83-138901), and to award the contract to another tenderer.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Council of 29 October 2013 not to accept the tender submitted by the applicant in tendering procedure UCA 034/13, relating to the purchase or hire of black and white multifunction printers (MFPs) and associated maintenance services in the buildings occupied by the General Secretariat of the Council in so far as it concerns lot No 4;










2.


Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.
Case C-548/14 P: Order of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 September 2015 — Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Grazia Equity GmbH (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Application for registration of the word mark GRAZIA — Opposition by the proprietor of the international, Community and national word and figurative marks including the word element ‘GRAZIA’ — Rejection of the opposition — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(5) — Reputation)
Date: 2015-09-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, publisher, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, venture capital








C_2015398EN.01000801.xml










30.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/8





Order of the Court (Third Chamber) of 17 September 2015 — Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Grazia Equity GmbH
(Case C-548/14 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Application for registration of the word mark GRAZIA - Opposition by the proprietor of the international, Community and national word and figurative marks including the word element ‘GRAZIA’ - Rejection of the opposition - Article 8(1)(b) - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(5) - Reputation))
(2015/C 398/09)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA (represented by: G. Dragotti, R. Valenti, S. Balice and E. Varese, avvocati)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Schifko, acting as Agent) and Grazia Equity GmbH (represented by: M. Müller, Rechtsanwalt)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


Arnoldo Mondadori Editore SpA shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).










3.


Grazia Equity GmbH shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 73, 2.3.2015.