do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-644/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area — Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information — Single infringement — Proof — Fines — Unlimited jurisdiction — Reasonable time — Proportionality)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, principle of proportionality, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000901.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/9





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch v European Commission
(Case C-644/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area - Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information - Single infringement - Proof - Fines - Unlimited jurisdiction - Reasonable time - Proportionality))
(2017/C 104/15)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: Villeroy & Boch (represented by: J. Philippe, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, L. Malferrari and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Villeroy & Boch SAS to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 45, 15.2.2014.
Case T-353/16: Order of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — European Social Enterprise Law Association v EUIPO (EUROPEAN SOCIAL ENTERPRISE LAW ASSOCIATION) (EU trade mark — Representation of the applicant by a lawyer who is not a third party — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, conference proceedings, legal profession, professional society, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017078EN.01003202.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/32





Order of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — European Social Enterprise Law Association v EUIPO (EUROPEAN SOCIAL ENTERPRISE LAW ASSOCIATION)
(Case T-353/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Representation of the applicant by a lawyer who is not a third party - Inadmissibility))
(2017/C 078/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: European Social Enterprise Law Association (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: L. Fletcher, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2016 (Case R 2208/2015-4), concerning an application for registration of the word sign EUROPEAN SOCIAL ENTERPRISE LAW ASSOCIATION as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


The European Social Enterprise Law Association shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 314, 29.8.2016.
Case T-119/16: Order of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Topera v EUIPO (RHYTHMVIEW) (EU trade mark — Application for the European Union word mark RHYTHMVIEW — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2017078EN.01003102.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/31





Order of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Topera v EUIPO (RHYTHMVIEW)
(Case T-119/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the European Union word mark RHYTHMVIEW - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law))
(2017/C 078/43)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Topera, Inc. (Abbott Park, Illinois, United States) (represented by: H. Sheraton, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 January 2016 (Case R 1368/2015-4), relating to an application for registration of the word sign RHYTHMVIEW as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


Topera, Inc., shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 200, 6.6.2016.
Case C-554/15: Order of the President of the Court of 26 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Cantabria — Spain) — Luca Jerónimo García Almodóvar, Catalina Molina Moreno v Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, SAU
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, interest, retroactivity of a law, unfair terms of contract








C_2017129EN.01001203.xml










24.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/12





Order of the President of the Court of 26 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Cantabria — Spain) — Luca Jerónimo García Almodóvar, Catalina Molina Moreno v Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria, SAU
(Case C-554/15) (1)

(2017/C 129/16)
Language of the case: Spanish
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 27, 25.1.2016.
Case C-625/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch AG v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area — Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information — Single infringement — Proof — Fines — Unlimited jurisdiction — Reasonable time — Proportionality)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, principle of proportionality, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000601.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/6





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Villeroy & Boch AG v European Commission
(Case C-625/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area - Price coordination and exchange of sensitive business information - Single infringement - Proof - Fines - Unlimited jurisdiction - Reasonable time - Proportionality))
(2017/C 104/09)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Villeroy & Boch AG (represented by: M. Klusmann and T. Kreifels, Rechtsanwälte, assisted by S. Thomas, Professor)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Malferrari, F. Castillo de la Torre and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Villeroy & Boch AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 39, 8.2.2014.
Case T-104/14 P-INTP: Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Commission v Verile and Gjergji (Proceedings — Interpretation of the judgment)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: legal expenses








C_2017078EN.01001702.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/17





Judgment of the General Court of 26 January 2017 — Commission v Verile and Gjergji
(Case T-104/14 P-INTP) (1)

((Proceedings - Interpretation of the judgment))
(2017/C 078/23)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellant: European Commission (represented by: D. Martin and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Marco Verile (Cadrezzate, Italy) and Anduela Gjergji (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Re:

Request for interpretation of the judgment of 13 October 2015, Commission v Verile and Gjergji (T-104/14 P, EU:T:2015:776).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1)


Paragraph 3 of the operative part of the judgment of 13 October 2015, Commission v Verile and Gjergji (T-104/14), must be interpreted as meaning that it covers both the costs relating to the appeal proceedings and those relating to the proceedings at first instance;










2)


Mr Marco Veril and Ms Anduela Gjergji, on the one hand, and the European Commission, on the other, shall each bear their own costs relating to the proceedings for interpretation;










3)


The original of this judgment shall be appended to the original of the judgment interpreted in the margin of which reference shall be made to this judgment.






(1)  OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.
Case T-46/17: Action brought on 26 January 2017 — TDH Group v EUIPO — Comercial de Servicios Agrigan (Pet Cuisine)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pet food, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017078EN.01003901.xml










13.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 78/39





Action brought on 26 January 2017 — TDH Group v EUIPO — Comercial de Servicios Agrigan (Pet Cuisine)
(Case T-46/17)
(2017/C 078/54)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: TDH Group (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: D. Chen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Comercial de Servicios Agrigan, SA (Huesca, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union No 1 203 373 in respect of figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Pet Cuisine’

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 November 2016 in Case R 685/2016-2

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 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.
No State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Iceland, State aid, control of State aid, electrical energy, sale








C_2017026EN.01000701.xml










26.1.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 26/7





No State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
(2017/C 26/05)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority considers that the following measure does not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement:








Date of adoption of the decision



:


24 October 2016





Case No



:


79525





Decision No



:


193/16/COL





EFTA State



:


Iceland





Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)



:


Sale of electricity to Norðurál





Legal basis



:


The Third Amendment to the power contract concluded in 1997 between Landsvirkjun and Norðurál Grundartangi ehf.





Type of measure



:


No State aid




The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:
http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/
Case C-352/16: Order of the President of the Court of 26 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Navarra — Spain) — Instituto de Religiosas Oblatas del Santísimo Redentor v Joaquín Taberna Carvajal
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competition policy, national law, provision of services, restriction on competition








C_2017112EN.01003201.xml










10.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/32





Order of the President of the Court of 26 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Navarra — Spain) — Instituto de Religiosas Oblatas del Santísimo Redentor v Joaquín Taberna Carvajal
(Case C-352/16) (1)

(2017/C 112/44)
Language of the case: Spanish
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 326, 5.9.2016.
Case C-45/16 P: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — d.d. Synergy Hellas Anonymi Emporiki Etaireia Parochis Ypiresion Pliroforikis v Commission (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — ‘Multi-level patient-specific artery and artherogenesis model for outcome prediction, decision support treatment, and virtual hand-on training (ARTreat) contract’, concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) — Termination of that contract due to irregularities committed in the performance of another contract concluded with the European Commission — Good faith — Legitimate expectation the contract would not be terminated)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, damages, proof, termination of a contract








C_2017104EN.01002301.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/23





Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — d.d. Synergy Hellas Anonymi Emporiki Etaireia Parochis Ypiresion Pliroforikis v Commission
(Case C-45/16 P) (1)

((Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - ‘Multi-level patient-specific artery and artherogenesis model for outcome prediction, decision support treatment, and virtual hand-on training (ARTreat) contract’, concluded under the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Termination of that contract due to irregularities committed in the performance of another contract concluded with the European Commission - Good faith - Legitimate expectation the contract would not be terminated))
(2017/C 104/33)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Appellant: d.d. Synergy Hellas Anonymi Emporiki Etaireia Parochis Ypiresion Pliroforikis (represented by: K. Damis, dikigoros)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeal is dismissed.










2.


d.d. Synergy Hellas Anonymi Emporiki Etaireia Parochis Ypiresion Pliroforikis is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 98, 14.03.2016.
Case T-71/17: Action brought on 26 January 2017 — France.com v EUIPO — France (FRANCE.com)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, database, information service, registered trade mark, tourism, trade-mark law








C_2017112EN.01004001.xml










10.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/40





Action brought on 26 January 2017 — France.com v EUIPO — France (FRANCE.com)
(Case T-71/17)
(2017/C 112/56)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: France.com, Inc. (Coral gables, Florida, Unite States) (represented by: A. Bertrand, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: French Republic

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘FRANCE.com’ — Application for registration No 13 158 597

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 October 2016 in Case R 2452/2015-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


submit the following preliminary questions to the Court of Justice: (i) In the light of Articles 8(2) and 41(1) of the European Trade Marks Regulation and of Rules 15(2)(b) and 17 of the European Union Trade Marks Implementing Regulation, in an opposition procedure, does the Applicant, as the defendant to the opposition have the right to invoke prior rights, which could constitute prior rights to the earlier trademark used as a prior right in the opposition? (ii) Does the French State have any kind of prior intellectual property right on the word ‘France’ which is not the official name of the French State and which is just a geographical entity? (iii) If the answer to the question (ii) is ‘No’, should the name ‘France’ be considered as a word which is in the public domain and on which no one can claim any intellectual property right? (iv) If the answer to the question (ii) is ‘Yes’, should the fact that the French State as of this day has never claim any rights in the word ‘France’ except against France.com be considered as a discrimination against the Applicant?










—


annul the contested decision;










—


rejects the opposition filed by the French State against the registration of the European semi-figurative trademark ‘France.com’ applied for by France.com Inc.;










—


dismiss the action as to the remainder;










—


order EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by France.com Inc. for the purpose of the proceedings before the Court;










—


order EUIPO and the French State each to pay half of the costs necessarily incurred by France.com Inc. for the purpose of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 8(1), 8(2) and 41(1) of Regulation No 207/2009;










—


Infringement of Rules 15(2)(b) and 17 of Regulation No 2868/95.
Case C-604/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Aloys F. Dornbracht GmbH & Co. KG v European Commission, Council of the European Union (Appeal — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Article 23(2) — Ceiling of 10 % of turnover — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Principle of non-retroactivity — Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction — Excessive duration of the proceedings)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, exchange of information, jurisdiction, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000201.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/2





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Aloys F. Dornbracht GmbH & Co. KG v European Commission, Council of the European Union
(Case C-604/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Article 23(2) - Ceiling of 10 % of turnover - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Principle of non-retroactivity - Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction - Excessive duration of the proceedings))
(2017/C 104/02)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Aloys F. Dornbracht GmbH & Co. KG (represented by: H. Janssen and T. Kapp, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and L. Malferrari, acting as Agents, and by A. Böhlke, Rechtsanwalt), Council of the European Union

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Aloys F. Dornbracht GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.
Case C-638/13 P: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Roca SARL v European Commission (Appeal — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria — Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Principle of equal treatment — Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction)
Date: 2017-01-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, cartel, domestic market, equal treatment, exchange of information, market-sharing agreement, plumbing equipment, price agreement, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2017104EN.01000801.xml










3.4.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 104/8





Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Roca SARL v European Commission
(Case C-638/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Principle of equal treatment - Exercise of unlimited jurisdiction))
(2017/C 104/13)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Roca SARL (represented by: P. Vidal Martínez, abogada)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castilla Contreras, F. Castillo de la Torre and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders Roca SARL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.