do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-805/19: Action brought on 21 November 2019 — Ultrasun v EUIPO (ultrasun)
Date: 2019-11-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020027EN.01006401.xml










27.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 27/64






Action brought on 21 November 2019 — Ultrasun v EUIPO (ultrasun)
(Case T-805/19)
(2020/C 27/63)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Ultrasun AG (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Mark at issue: Registration of EU figurative mark in colour containing the word element ‘ultrasun’ — Registration No 17 898 795

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2019 in Case R 531/2019-4

Form of order sought







—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-379/18: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Deutsche Lufthansa AG v Land Berlin (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Air transport — Directive 2009/12/EC — Articles 3 and 6 — Article 11(1) and (7) — Airport charges — Protection of airport users’ rights — Whether it is possible for the airport managing body to agree charges lower than those approved by the independent supervisory authority — Remedies available to an airport user — Collateral challenge before a civil court giving judgment on the basis of equitable criteria)
Date: 2019-11-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: airport, charges for use of infrastructure, supervisory body, traffic regulations








C_2020027EN.01000501.xml










27.1.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 27/5






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Deutsche Lufthansa AG v Land Berlin
(Case C-379/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Directive 2009/12/EC - Articles 3 and 6 - Article 11(1) and (7) - Airport charges - Protection of airport users’ rights - Whether it is possible for the airport managing body to agree charges lower than those approved by the independent supervisory authority - Remedies available to an airport user - Collateral challenge before a civil court giving judgment on the basis of equitable criteria)
(2020/C 27/05)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG

Defendant: Land Berlin

Interveners: Berliner Flughafen GmbH, Vertreter des Bundesinteresses beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Directive 2009/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on airport charges, in particular Article 3, Article 6(5)(a) and Article 11(1) and (7) thereof, must be interpreted as precluding a national provision that allows an airport managing body to determine, together with an airport user, airport charges different from those set by that body and approved by the independent supervisory authority, within the meaning of that directive.










2.


Directive 2009/12 must be interpreted as precluding an interpretation of national law whereby an airport user is prevented from challenging directly the decision of the independent supervisory authority approving the charging system, but can bring an action against the airport managing body before a civil court and can plead in that action only that the charges determined in the charging system that that user must pay are inequitable.






(1)  OJ C 276, 6.8.2018.
Case C-324/18: Order of the President of the Ninth Chamber of the Court of 21 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Sicilville Srl v Comune di Brescia, intervening party: Consorzio Stabile A.L.P.I. s.c.a.r.l.
Date: 2019-11-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: disciplinary proceedings, equal treatment, judicial proceedings, principle of proportionality, public contract, termination of a contract








C_2020137EN.01004202.xml










27.4.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 137/42






Order of the President of the Ninth Chamber of the Court of 21 November 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Sicilville Srl v Comune di Brescia, intervening party: Consorzio Stabile A.L.P.I. s.c.a.r.l.
(Case C-324/18) (1)

(2020/C 137/59)
Language of the case: Italian
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 285, 13.8.2018.