do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-223/16: Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2017 — Massive Bionics v EUIPO — Apple (DriCloud) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark DriCloud — Earlier international word marks ICLOUD — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Submission of evidence out of time — Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-07-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2017283EN.01004201.xml










28.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 283/42





Judgment of the General Court of 14 July 2017 — Massive Bionics v EUIPO — Apple (DriCloud)
(Case T-223/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark DriCloud - Earlier international word marks ICLOUD - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Submission of evidence out of time - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2017/C 283/63)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Massive Bionics, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: M. Galindo Martens, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Apple Inc. (Cupertino, California, United States) (represented by: J. Olsen and P. Andreottola, Solicitors, and G. Tritton, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 March 2016 (Case R 339/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Apple and Massive Bionics.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Massive Bionics, SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.
Judgment of the Court of 14 July 2017 in Case E-9/16 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway (REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 – Chemical substances – Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) – Free movement – Restrictions procedure – Legal basis)
Date: 2017-07-14
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Norway, acid, consumer protection, goods and services, infringement procedure (EU), market approval, national law, toxic substance, trade restriction








C_2018001EN.01000701.xml










4.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 1/7





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 14 July 2017
in Case E-9/16
EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway

(REACH Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 – Chemical substances – Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) – Free movement – Restrictions procedure – Legal basis)

(2018/C 1/09)
In Case E-9/16, EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway – APPLICATION for a declaration that Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations arising from the Act referred to at point 12zc of Chapter XV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)), as adapted under its Protocol 1, and/or its obligations under the Agreement, by maintaining in force a national provision such as Section 2-32 of the Norwegian Product Regulation which bans the manufacture, import, export and sale of consumer products containing certain concentrations of perfluorooctanoic acid, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President and Judge-Rapporteur, Per Christiansen and Ása Ólafsdóttir (ad hoc), Judges, gave judgment on 14 July 2017, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Dismisses the application.










2.


Orders the EFTA Surveillance Authority to bear the costs of the proceedings.
Case T-439/17: Action brought on 14 July 2017 — Yellow Window v EIGE
Date: 2017-07-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, damages, equal treatment, principle of proportionality, provision of services, tendering, transparency in decision-making








C_2017338EN.01001502.xml










9.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/15





Action brought on 14 July 2017 — Yellow Window v EIGE
(Case T-439/17)
(2017/C 338/16)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Yellow Window (Antwerp, Belgium) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Institute for Gender Equality

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


set aside the contested decision of 8 May 2017 assessing not successful the applicant’s tender in procedure EIGE/2017/OPER/04 ‘Female Genital Mutilation: Estimating Girls at Risk’ and subsequent decisions to assess the bid of another tenderer successful and to award the contract to it;










—


order the defendant to pay damages suffered by the applicant as well as an interest of 8 % or in the alternative to award a compensation as well as a compensation of 8 %;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging an infringement of the principle of equal treatment, of the principle of transparency, of the principle to act with a certain care, of the duty to respect confidentiality as well as alleging manifest error of appraisal.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging inconsistency in the grounds, infringement of the principle of proportionality while assessing the applicant's tender.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the right to a good administration.
Case T-443/17: Action brought on 14 July 2017 — António Conde & Companhia v Commission
Date: 2017-07-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, crustacean, fishing regulations, fishing vessel, international waters, sea fish








C_2017293EN.01003901.xml










4.9.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 293/39





Action brought on 14 July 2017 — António Conde & Companhia v Commission
(Case T-443/17)
(2017/C 293/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: António Conde & Companhia, SA (Gafanha de Nazaré, Portugal) (represented by: J. García-Gallardo Gil-Fournier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the Commission’s decision refusal to forward promptly to the Secretary of the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission the names of the Portuguese-licensed vessels SANTA ISABEL and CALVÃO, thus preventing them from operating, as from 1 July 2017, in the fishing zones of the North-East Atlantic, in order to fish for redfish and shrimp, and thereby infringing Article 5(1) of Regulation No 1236/2010 (1);










—


order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging that the defendant has acted in breach of Article 5(1) of Regulation No 1236/2010 by interfering in the process of drafting or communication of the list of vessels drawn up by Portugal for forwarding to the Secretary of the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission. The defendant is not entitled to comment upon, amend, make recommendations regarding, assess, deny, draft or put pressure on the Member States in respect of such lists.


(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1236/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2010 laying down a scheme of control and enforcement applicable in the area covered by the Convention on future multilateral cooperation in the North-East Atlantic fisheries and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2791/1999 (OJ 2010 L 348, p. 17).