do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-510/15 P: Appeal brought on 24 September 2015 by Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria, SA against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 15 July 2015 in Case T-398/10 Fapricela v Commission
Date: 2015-09-24
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: cartel, competition, equal treatment, fine, market-sharing agreement, price agreement, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, trade information, turnover








C_2015381EN.01002501.xml










16.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 381/25





Appeal brought on 24 September 2015 by Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria, SA against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 15 July 2015 in Case T-398/10 Fapricela v Commission
(Case C-510/15 P)
(2015/C 381/27)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Appellant: Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria, SA (represented by: T. Caiado Guerreiro and R. Rodrigues Lopes, advogados)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court of Justice should:






(i)


adjust the volume of sales taken into account in the calculation of the fine;










(ii)


set aside the judgment under appeal, in part, in so far as it relates to:






—


the volume of sales to be taken into account;










—


the burden of proof relating to the duration of the participation in the cartel;










—


the attribution of a greater degree of gravity of the infringement compared with Fundia;










—


the allocation of an excessive additional amount;














(iii)


and accordingly, adjust the amount of the fine, specifically by:






—


adjusting the volume of sales;










—


adjusting the duration of the infringement;










—


adjusting the reference year for calculating the fine;










—


adjusting the degree of gravity of the infringement, by attributing a degree of gravity of 16 % (equal to that attributed to Fundia); and










—


adjusting the additional amount;














(iv)


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments







a)


The volume of sales, taken into account by the Commission for the purposes of calculating the penalty and upheld by the General Court, is tainted by clear errors which need to be adjusted.










b)


The General Court improperly allocated the burden of proof and, in that respect, infringed the principle of the presumption of innocence in the examination of the facts.










c)


The General Court did not fulfil its obligation to state reasons and infringed the principle of equal treatment in its calculation of the penalty, resulting in a finding of an excessive degree of gravity of the infringement.










d)


The General Court infringed the principle of proportionality in its determination of the additional amount for the purpose of deterrence, which affected, inter alia, the proportionality of the penalty.
Case T-563/15: Action brought on 24 September 2015 — Paglieri Sell System v OHIM (APOTEKE)
Date: 2015-09-24
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmacy, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2015371EN.01004501.xml










9.11.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 371/45





Action brought on 24 September 2015 — Paglieri Sell System v OHIM (APOTEKE)
(Case T-563/15)
(2015/C 371/46)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Paglieri Sell System SpA (Pozzolo Formigaro, Italy) (represented by: P. Pozzi and F. Braga, lawyers)

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

Details of the proceedings before OHIM


Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘APOTEKE’ — Application for registration No 13 014 691

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 July 2015 in Case R 2428/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that there was a breach and incorrect application of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


declare that there was a breach of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


annul the contested decision;










—


order OHIM to pay the costs and fees incurred for the present proceedings.





Pleas in law







—


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










—


Infringement of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009.
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2015-09-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Faroes, Germany, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, sea fish, sea fishing








C_2015316EN.01000502.xml










24.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 316/5





Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(2015/C 316/08)
In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


21.8.2015




Duration


21.8 – 31.12.2015




Member State


Germany




Stock or Group of stocks


WHB/2A4AXF




Species


Blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou)




Zone


Faroese waters




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


36/TQ104






(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.