do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-370/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — KPN v Commission (Competition — Concentrations — Netherlands market for television services and telecommunications services — Full-function joint venture — Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement — Commitments — Relevant market — Vertical effects — Manifest error of assessment — Duty to state reasons)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU competition policy, Netherlands, economic concentration, joint venture, merger control, telecommunications








C_2019246EN.01001801.xml










22.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/18






Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — KPN v Commission
(Case T-370/17) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Netherlands market for television services and telecommunications services - Full-function joint venture - Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Commitments - Relevant market - Vertical effects - Manifest error of assessment - Duty to state reasons)
(2019/C 246/18)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: KPN BV (The Hague, Netherlands) (represented by: P. van Ginneken and G. Béquet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet, G. Conte, J. Szczodrowski and F. van Schaik, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: VodafoneZiggo Group Holding BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands), Vodafone Group plc (Newbury, United Kingdom), Liberty Global Europe Holding BV (Amsterdam) (represented by: W. Knibbeler, E. Raedts and A. Pliego Selie, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 5165 final of 3 August 2016 declaring the concentration involving the acquisition by Vodafone Group and Liberty Global Europe Holding of joint control of a full-function joint venture to be compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.7978 — Vodafone — Liberty Global — Dutch JV).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders KPN BV to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, VodafoneZiggo Group Holding BV, Vodafone Group plc and Liberty Global Europe Holding BV.







(1)  OJ C 249, 31.7.2017.
Case T-312/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Dentsply De Trey v EUIPO — IDS (AQUAPRINT) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark AQUAPRINT — Earlier national word marks AQUACEM and national unregistered marks AQUACEM and AQUASIL — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance — Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Action for passing off — No misrepresentation)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, chemical product, dental medicine, medical device, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019238EN.01001601.xml










15.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 238/16






Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Dentsply De Trey v EUIPO — IDS (AQUAPRINT)
(Case T-312/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark AQUAPRINT - Earlier national word marks AQUACEM and national unregistered marks AQUACEM and AQUASIL - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance - Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Action for passing off - No misrepresentation)
(2019/C 238/20)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Dentsply De Trey GmbH (Konstanz, Germany) (represented by: S. Clark, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaite-Orlovskiene, J. Ivanauskas and H. O’Neill, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: IDS SpA (Savone, Italy) (represented by: M. Andreolini and F. Andreolini, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 February 2018 (Case R 1438/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Dentsply De Trey and IDS

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Dentsply De Trey GmbH to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 240, 9.7.2018
Case T-631/16: Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Remag Metallhandel and Jaschinsky v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Anti-dumping — OLAF’s insistence that Member States recover anti-dumping duties relating to any importation of silicon metal originating in Taiwan without proof that that silicon metal originated in China — Regulation (EC) No 398/2004 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 467/2010 — Causal link)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, European Anti-fraud Office, Taiwan, anti-dumping duty, import (EU), indemnification, originating product, semi-metal








C_2019238EN.01001501.xml










15.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 238/15






Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Remag Metallhandel and Jaschinsky v Commission
(Case T-631/16) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Anti-dumping - OLAF’s insistence that Member States recover anti-dumping duties relating to any importation of silicon metal originating in Taiwan without proof that that silicon metal originated in China - Regulation (EC) No 398/2004 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 467/2010 - Causal link)
(2019/C 238/18)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Remag Metallhandel GmbH (Steyr, Austria) and Werner Jaschinsky (St. Ulrich bei Steyr, Austria) (represented by: M. Lux, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Caeiros and A. Lewis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 268 TFEU, seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of the request by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) that the customs authorities of the Member States recover anti-dumping duties for consignments of silicon exported from Taiwan to the European Union.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Remag Metallhandel GmbH and Mr Werner Jaschinsky to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.
Case C-634/17: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 May 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Oldenburg — Germany) — ReFood GmbH & Co. KG v Landwirtschaftskammer Niedersachsen (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Environment — Shipments of waste within the European Union — Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 — Article 1(3)(d) — Scope — Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 — Shipments of animal by-products)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: animal product, by-product, food safety, veterinary inspection, waste management








C_2019263EN.01000501.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/5






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 May 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Oldenburg — Germany) — ReFood GmbH & Co. KG v Landwirtschaftskammer Niedersachsen
(Case C-634/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Environment - Shipments of waste within the European Union - Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 - Article 1(3)(d) - Scope - Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 - Shipments of animal by-products)
(2019/C 263/05)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Oldenburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: ReFood GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Landwirtschaftskammer Niedersachsen

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(3)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on shipments of waste, must be interpreted as meaning that shipments of animal by-products falling within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 (Animal by-products Regulation), are excluded from the scope of Regulation No 1013/2006, unless Regulation No 1069/2009 expressly provides for the application of Regulation No 1013/2006.


(1)  OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.
Case C-400/19: Action brought on 23 May 2019 — European Commission v Hungary
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action for failure to fulfil an obligation, agricultural product, foodstuff, infringement procedure (EU), measure having equivalent effect, minimum price, principle of proportionality, restriction on competition, supplier








C_2019255EN.01002502.xml










29.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 255/25






Action brought on 23 May 2019 — European Commission v Hungary
(Case C-400/19)
(2019/C 255/34)
Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Sipos, A. Lewis and E. Manhaeve, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Hungary

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:






—


Declare that, by restricting the fixing of sale prices of agricultural and food products, having particular regard to Article 3(2)(u) of the a mezőgazdasági és élelmiszeripari termékek vonatkozásában a beszállítókkal szemben alkalmazott tisztességtelen forgalmazói magatartás tilalmáról szóló, 2009. évi XCV. törvény (Law XCV of 2009 prohibiting unfair trading practices by suppliers in respect of agricultural and food products), Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products; (1)











—


Order Hungary to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

Law XCV of 2009 prohibiting unfair trading practices by suppliers in respect of agricultural and food products (‘the Tfmtv’) introduced sector-specific provisions in relation to the fixing of the retail prices of the products in question.
The Commission submits that Article 3(2)(u) of the Tfmtv does not refer to the characteristics of agricultural and food products, but solely to their selling arrangements, and must therefore be regarded as a provision relating to sales arrangements within the meaning of the Keck and Mithouard judgment (see judgment of 24 November 1993, Keck and Mithouard, Joined Cases C-267/91 and C-268/91, EU:C:1993:905). In analysing the effects of that measure, it can be said to be a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction on trade between Member States within the meaning of Article 34 TFEU.
According to the Commission, Article 3(2)(u) of the Tfmtv does not in fact affect the sale of domestic and imported products in equal measure, and is neither an adequate nor proportionate measure with regard to any legitimate aim connected to it.


(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ 2013 L 347, p. 671).
Case T-609/18: Order of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Fujifilm Recording Media v EUIPO — iTernity (d:ternity) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Application for the EU word mark d:ternity — Earlier word mark iTernity — Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity before the action was brought — Invalidation of the contested decision — No interest in bringing proceedings — Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer equipment, data processing, electricity storage device, electro-magnetic equipment, information storage and retrieval, magnetic medium, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019246EN.01002301.xml










22.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/23






Order of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Fujifilm Recording Media v EUIPO — iTernity (d:ternity)
(Case T-609/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Application for the EU word mark d:ternity - Earlier word mark iTernity - Withdrawal of the application for a declaration of invalidity before the action was brought - Invalidation of the contested decision - No interest in bringing proceedings - Action in part inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(2019/C 246/24)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Fujifilm Recording Media (Kleve, Germany) (represented by: R.-D. Härer, C. Schultze, C. Weber, H. Ranzinger and C. Gehweiler, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: iTernity GmbH (Freiburg, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 July 2018 (Case R 2324/2017-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between iTernity and Fujifilm Recording Media.

Operative part of the order







1.



The action is dismissed.











2.



Each party shall bear its own costs.







(1)  OJ C 445, 10.12.2018.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/843 of 23 May 2019 on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 36th partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common organisation of markets, intervention buying, invitation to tender, minimum price, purchase price, skimmed milk powder, tendering








L_2019138EN.01008101.xml










24.5.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 138/81








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2019/843
of 23 May 2019
         
on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the 36th partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),


Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1240 of 18 May 2016 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to public intervention and aid for private storage (2), and in particular Article 32 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure.












(2)


In the light of the tenders received for the 36th partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should be fixed.












(3)


The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
For the 36th partial invitation to tender for the selling of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080, in respect of which the period during which tenders were to be submitted ended on 21 May 2019, the minimum selling price shall be 167,50 EUR/100 kg.


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 23 May 2019.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Jerzy PLEWA
            

Director-General


Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development






(1)  
            OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(2)  
            OJ L 206, 30.7.2016, p. 71.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 of 25 November 2016 opening the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure (OJ L 321, 29.11.2016, p. 45).
Case T-317/19: Action brought on 23 May 2019 — AMVAC Netherlands v Commission
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: market approval, plant health control, plant health product, precautionary principle, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2019263EN.01005001.xml










5.8.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/50






Action brought on 23 May 2019 — AMVAC Netherlands v Commission
(Case T-317/19)
(2019/C 263/57)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: AMVAC Netherlands BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: C. Mereu, M. Grunchard and S. Englebert, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/344 of 28 February 2019; (1)











—


order the defendant to pay all the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the contested regulation was adopted further to a manifest error of assessment.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the contested regulation results from a procedure during which the applicant’s rights of defence were not respected.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the contested regulation was adopted in breach of the principle of legal certainty.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested regulation was adopted in breach of the proportionality principle.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the contested regulation was adopted in breach of the precautionary principle.






(1)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/344 of 28 February 2019 concerning the non-renewal of approval of the active substance ethoprophos, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, and amending the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 (OJ 2019 L 62, p. 7).
Case T-439/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Sintokogio v EUIPO (ProAssist) (EU trade mark — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark ProAssist — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001 — Equal treatment)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, industrial electric machinery, maintenance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2019238EN.01001802.xml










15.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 238/18






Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Sintokogio v EUIPO (ProAssist)
(Case T-439/18) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark ProAssist - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001 - Equal treatment)
(2019/C 238/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sintokogio Ltd (Nagoya, Japan) (represented initially by: V. Dalichau, S. Kirschstein-Freund and B. Breitinger, lawyers, and subsequently by S. Kirschstein-Freund and B. Breitinger, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 May 2018 (Case R 2341/2017-2), relating to the international registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark ProAssist.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Sintokogio Ltd to pay the costs.







(1)  OJ C 328, 17.9.2018.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9375 — Clearlake/Insight/Appriss) (Text with EEA relevance.)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, information analysis, information technology industry, investment company, merger control, provision of services








C_2019192EN.01000501.xml










7.6.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 192/5






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9375 — Clearlake/Insight/Appriss)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 192/02)
On 23 May 2019, 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 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 32019M9375. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-837/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Negru v EUIPO — Sky (SkyPrivate) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark SkyPrivate — Earlier national word mark SKY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2019-05-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, consultancy, electronic commerce, electronic money, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2019238EN.01001502.xml










15.7.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 238/15






Judgment of the General Court of 23 May 2019 — Negru v EUIPO — Sky (SkyPrivate)
(Case T-837/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark SkyPrivate - Earlier national word mark SKY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2019/C 238/19)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Alexandru Negru (Iași, Romania) (represented by: initially I.-M. Iliescu, and subsequently by T. Protopopescu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents,)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Sky Ltd, formerly Sky plc, (Isleworth, United Kingdom) (represented by K. Saliger, Solicitor, and P. Roberts QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 October 2017 (Case R 349/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Sky and Mr Negru.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.



Dismisses the action;











2.



Orders Mr Alexandru Negru to pay the costs, including those incurred by Sky Ltd for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).







(1)  OJ C 72, 26.2.2018.