do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-404/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Galletas Gullon v EUIPO — O2 Holdings (Shape of a package)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, confectionery product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016343EN.01004201.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/42





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Galletas Gullon v EUIPO — O2 Holdings (Shape of a package)
(Case T-404/16)
(2016/C 343/56)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Galletas Gullon, SA (Aguilar de Campoo, Spain) (represented by: M. Escudero Pérez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: O2 Holdings Ltd (Slough, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: tridimensional mark (Shape of a package) — EU trade mark No 3 408 424

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 May 2016 in Case R 1613/2015-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the other party, should it intervene, to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case M.7917 — Boehringer Ingelheim/Sanofi Animal Health Business) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, pharmaceutical industry








C_2016276EN.01002101.xml










29.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/21





Withdrawal of notification of a concentration
(Case M.7917 — Boehringer Ingelheim/Sanofi Animal Health Business)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2016/C 276/02)
(Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004)
On 8 June 2016, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration between Boehringer Ingelheim and Sanofi Animal Health Business. On 22 July 2016, the notifying party/ies informed the Commission that it/they withdrew its/their notification.
Case T-429/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Martín Osete v EUIPO — Rey (AN IDEAL HUSBAND)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016343EN.01004801.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/48





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Martín Osete v EUIPO — Rey (AN IDEAL HUSBAND)
(Case T-429/16)
(2016/C 343/65)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Isabel Martín Osete (Paris, France) (represented by: V. Wellens, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Daniella Rey (Toulouse, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘AN IDEAL HUSBAND’ — EU trade mark No 5 231 808

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 April 2016 in Case R 1526/2015-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 55(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-423/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — De Masi v Commission
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, code of conduct, fiscal policy, infringement of EU law








C_2016371EN.01001501.xml










10.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 371/15





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — De Masi v Commission
(Case T-423/16)
(2016/C 371/17)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Fabio De Masi (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: Prof. A. Fischer-Lescano)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the defendant’s decision of 20 May 2016 on the application for access to the documents of the Code of Conduct Group;










—


annul the defendant’s decision of 13 July 2016 on the application for access to the documents of the Code of Conduct Group;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings and the costs of any intervening party pursuant to Article 87(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law: infringement of Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1)

The applicant claims that the defendant’s decisions of May 2016 and 13 July 2016 infringe the right to an appropriate decision on the confirmatory application decision, laid down in the aforementioned provision.










2.


Second plea in law: infringement of Article 15(3) TFEU in conjunction with Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
The applicant also submits that the refusal of full access to the documents concerning the Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) set up by the Council in addition infringes its right of scrutiny over those documents, which is guaranteed by the aforementioned provisions.
The applicant claims, in that regard, that the exceptions to the transparency requirement to which Article 4(3) and (1)(a), fourth indent, of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 refers are not applicable in the present case.
Furthermore, there was a lack of consideration and a failure to state adequate reasons, as well as an overriding public interest in the disclosure of the documents.






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2012 L 145, p. 43).
Judgment of the Court of 29 July 2016 in Case E-30/15 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2011/62/EU amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Iceland, illicit trade, industrial counterfeiting, market approval, medicinal product








C_2017108EN.01001301.xml










6.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/13





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 29 July 2016
in Case E-30/15
EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland
(Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2011/62/EU amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use)
(2017/C 108/11)
In Case E-30/15, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 15q of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2011/62/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2011 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use, as regards the prevention of the entry into the legal supply chain of falsified medicinal products) as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed, or in any event by failing to inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority thereof, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 29 July 2016, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Declares that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 15q of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2011/62/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2011 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use, as regards the prevention of the entry into the legal supply chain of falsified medicinal products) as adapted to the Agreement under its Protocol 1, and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed.










2.


Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Case T-430/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Intercontinental Exchange Holdings v EUIPO (BRENT INDEX)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, financial services, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016371EN.01001601.xml










10.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 371/16





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Intercontinental Exchange Holdings v EUIPO (BRENT INDEX)
(Case T-430/16)
(2016/C 371/18)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Intercontinental Exchange Holdings, Inc. (Atlanta, Georgia, United States) (represented by: P. Heusler, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘BRENT INDEX’ — Application for registration No 14 284 947

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2016 in Case R 8/2016-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay de costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Corrigendum to Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (OJ C 171, 12.5.2016)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Czechia, air transport, invitation to tender, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2016276EN.01002302.xml










29.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/23





Corrigendum to Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 171 of 12 May 2016
)
(2016/C 276/05)
On page 5, section ‘Deadline for submission of tenders’:

for:


‘27 June 2016, 10:00 CET’,


read:


‘15 August 2016, 10:00 CET’.
Case F-37/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — ZZ v EIB
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European civil service, health expenditure, indemnification, sexual harassment








C_2016335EN.01005402.xml










12.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 335/54





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — ZZ v EIB
(Case F-37/16)
(2016/C 335/71)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZZ (represented by: B. Maréchal, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB)

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision, rendered in the framework of the Dignity at work investigation procedure regarding sexual harassment allegations, rejecting the complaint filed by the applicant as well as the compensation of the moral prejudice and of the medical costs incurred by the applicant.

Form of order sought







—


Cancel the decision dated 16 October 2015 rendered in the framework of the Dignity at Work investigation procedure launched by the applicant dated 20 May 2015 against her supervisor, as investigated by the Investigation Panel and annulment of the Report by the Investigation Panel dated 14 September 2015 related to the Dignity at Work request filed by the applicant, in which her complaint has been rejected and inappropriate recommendations have been included, including a sanitization of the report;










—


Compensate for medical costs as a result of the damage suffered from the applicant in an amount of (i) 977 EUR to date (including VAT) and (ii) a provisional amount of 5 850 EUR for future medical costs;










—


Grant damages in relation to the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant amounting 20 000 EUR;










—


Order the defendant to bear the costs.
Judgment of the Court of 29 July 2016 in Case E-32/15 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Principality of Liechtenstein (Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2006/126/EC — Directive 2011/94/EU — Directive 2012/36/EU)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Liechtenstein, driving instruction, driving licence, technical specification, technical standard, transport regulations








C_2017108EN.01001501.xml










6.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 108/15





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 29 July 2016
in Case E-32/15
EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Principality of Liechtenstein
(Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2006/126/EC — Directive 2011/94/EU — Directive 2012/36/EU)
(2017/C 108/13)
In Case E-32/15, EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Principality of Liechtenstein — APPLICATION for a declaration that the Principality of Liechtenstein has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Acts referred to at point 24f of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (recast), Commission Directive 2011/94/EU of 28 November 2011 amending Directive 2006/126/EC and Commission Directive 2012/36/EU of 19 November 2012 amending Directive 2006/126/EC), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Acts within the time prescribed, or in any event by failing to inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority thereof, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 29 July 2016, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Declares that the Principality of Liechtenstein has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Acts referred to at point 24f of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (recast), Commission Directive 2011/94/EU of 28 November 2011 amending Directive 2006/126/EC and Commission Directive 2012/36/EU of 19 November 2012 amending Directive 2006/126/EC), as adapted to the Agreement under its Protocol 1, and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Acts within the times prescribed.










2.


Orders the Principality of Liechtenstein to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate








C_2016276EN.01002201.xml










29.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/22





Euro exchange rates (1)

28 July 2016
(2016/C 276/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1090 




JPY


Japanese yen


116,14 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4398 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84220 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5497 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0892 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,4405 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


27,045 




HUF


Hungarian forint


312,15 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3636 




RON


Romanian leu


4,4585 




TRY


Turkish lira


3,3491 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4735 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4595 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6022 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,5646 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4977 




KRW


South Korean won


1 251,17 




ZAR


South African rand


15,7968 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3838 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,4855 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


14 530,67 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5018 




PHP


Philippine peso


52,242 




RUB


Russian rouble


73,6747 




THB


Thai baht


38,676 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,6306 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,8716 




INR


Indian rupee


74,3543 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-401/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Spain v Commission
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EPSO, administrator, competition (EU), official language, staff regulations (EU)








C_2016383EN.01001601.xml










17.10.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 383/16





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-401/16)
(2016/C 383/22)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Centeno Huerta and M. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:






—


annul the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/323/16 — Investigators (AD 7) and EPSO/AD/324/16 — Investigators (AD 9): Team leaders;










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 1 and 2 of Regulation 1/58, Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and Article 1d of the Staff Regulations, by restricting the system of communication between EPSO and the applicant, which extends to the application form.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Articles 1 and 6 of Regulation 1/58, Article 22 of the Charter, Articles 1d(1) and (6), 27 and 28(f) of the Staff Regulations and Article 1 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations because the choice of second language is improperly restricted to solely three languages, namely English, French and German, to the exclusion of the other official languages of the European Union.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging discrimination on the ground of language prohibited by Article 1 of Regulation 1/58, Article 22 of the Charter, Articles 1d(1) and (6), 27 and 28(f) of the Staff Regulations and Article 1 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations, since the choice of English, French and German was arbitrary.




The applicant states, in that regard, that those grounds of challenge must be read in the light of the judgment of the Court of Justice of 27 November 2012 in Case C-566/10 P, Italy v Commission, and of the judgments of the General Court of 24 September 2015, in the Joined Cases Spain v Commission and Italy v Commission (T-191/13 and T-124/13), and 17 December 2015 (T-275/13, T-295/13 and T-510/13, Italy v Commission), which have become final, since they have not been appealed by the Commission, and the implementation of which is not reflected in the present notice.
Case T-439/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — holyGhost v EUIPO — CBM (holyGhost)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2016350EN.01002501.xml










26.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 350/25





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — holyGhost v EUIPO — CBM (holyGhost)
(Case T-439/16)
(2016/C 350/31)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: holyGhost GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: M. Wiedemann and S. Engbrink, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: CBM Creative Brands Marken GmbH (Zurich, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘holyGhost’ — Application for registration No 11 757 853

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 May 2016 in Case R 2867/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Corrigendum to Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (OJ C 171, 12.5.2016)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Czechia, air transport, invitation to tender, services of general interest, transport regulations








C_2016276EN.01002301.xml










29.7.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 276/23





Corrigendum to Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community
Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations
(
Official Journal of the European Union C 171 of 12 May 2016
)
(2016/C 276/04)
On page 4, section ‘Deadline for submission of tenders’:

for:


‘27 June 2016, 10:00 CET’,


read:


‘15 August 2016, 10:00 CET’.
Case T-425/16: Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Hoffmann v EUIPO (Genius)
Date: 2016-07-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, clothing, electronics industry, gaming, paper, registered trade mark, research and development, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2016343EN.01004601.xml










19.9.2016   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 343/46





Action brought on 29 July 2016 — Hoffmann v EUIPO (Genius)
(Case T-425/16)
(2016/C 343/62)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Karl Hoffmann (Bad Schwalbach, Germany) (represented by: C. Jonas, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘Genius’ — Application No 13 509 071

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2016 in Case R 1631/2015-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


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