do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-729/19: Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Dinamo v EUIPO (Favorit) (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark Favorit — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, non-alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020329EN.01001502.xml










5.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/15






Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Dinamo v EUIPO (Favorit)
(Case T-729/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Favorit - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2020/C 329/32)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Dinamo GmbH (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Weil, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 September 2019 (Case R 985/2019-2) relating to the application for registration of the word sign Favorit as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Dinamo GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 423, 16.12.2019.
Case C-905/19: Order of the President of the Court of 8 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt — Germany) — EP v Kreis Groß-Gerau
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Tunisia, agreement (EU), discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, foreign national, migrant worker, residence permit, work permit








C_2020329EN.01001201.xml










5.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/12






Order of the President of the Court of 8 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Darmstadt — Germany) — EP v Kreis Groß-Gerau
(Case C-905/19) (1)

(2020/C 329/23)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.
Case T-429/18: Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — BRF and SHB Comércio e Indústria de Alimentos v Commission (Public health — Specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption — Amendment of the lists of third country establishments from which imports of specified products of animal origin are permitted, regarding certain establishments from Brazil — Article 12(4)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 — Comitology — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of defence — Powers of the Commission — Equal treatment — Proportionality)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Brazil, comitology, equal treatment, import (EU), import licence, meat, meat product, originating product, principle of proportionality, right to justice








C_2020339EN.01001101.xml










12.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/11






Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — BRF and SHB Comércio e Indústria de Alimentos v Commission
(Case T-429/18) (1)

(Public health - Specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption - Amendment of the lists of third country establishments from which imports of specified products of animal origin are permitted, regarding certain establishments from Brazil - Article 12(4)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 - Comitology - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of defence - Powers of the Commission - Equal treatment - Proportionality)
(2020/C 339/12)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: BRF SA (Itajaí, Brazil) and SHB Comércio e Indústria de Alimentos SA (Itajaí) (represented by: D. Arts and G. van Thuyne, lawyers)

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

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/700 of 8 May 2018 amending the lists of third country establishments from which imports of specified products of animal origin are permitted, regarding certain establishments from Brazil (OJ 2018 L 118, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders BRF SA and SHB Comércio e Indústria de Alimentos SA to pay the costs of the Commission, including those pertaining to the interim proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 341, 24.9.2018.
Case T-758/14 RENV: Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Infineon Technologies v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for smart card chips — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Exchanges of commercially sensitive information — Unlimited jurisdiction — Calculation of the amount of the fine — Taking into consideration of the participation only in a part of a network of bilateral contacts between competitors)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: cartel, control of restrictive practices, electronic component, exchange of information, judicial review, proof, restriction on competition, rights of the defence, sanction (EU), trade information








C_2020339EN.01001001.xml










12.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/10






Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Infineon Technologies v Commission
(Case T-758/14 RENV) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for smart card chips - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Exchanges of commercially sensitive information - Unlimited jurisdiction - Calculation of the amount of the fine - Taking into consideration of the participation only in a part of a network of bilateral contacts between competitors)
(2020/C 339/11)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Infineon Technologies AG (Neubiberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Dreher, T. Lübbig and M. Klusmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan, A. Dawes and J. Norris, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 6250 final of 3 September 2014 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39574 — Smart Card Chips) or, in the alternative, for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Infineon Technologies by subparagraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2014) 6250 final of 3 September 2014 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39574 — Smart Card Chips) at EUR 76 871 600;










2.


Orders Infineon Technologies and the European Commission to bear their own costs, including those incurred in the original proceedings before the General Court in Case T-758/14, those incurred in the appeal proceedings in Case C-99/17 P and those incurred in the proceedings referred back to the General Court.






(1)  OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.
Case T-350/19: Order of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Bontempi and Others v Sand Cph (WhiteSand)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020348EN.01002702.xml










19.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 348/27






Order of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Bontempi and Others v Sand Cph (WhiteSand)
(Case T-350/19) (1)

(2020/C 348/39)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Tenth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 255, 29.7.2019.
Case T-633/19: Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Essential Export v EUIPO — Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading (TOTU) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for a figurative EU trade mark allegedly containing the word element ‘TOTU’ and coloured red and black — Earlier EU trade marks TOTTO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, personal effects, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2020313EN.01002701.xml










21.9.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 313/27






Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Essential Export v EUIPO — Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading (TOTU)
(Case T-633/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a figurative EU trade mark allegedly containing the word element ‘TOTU’ and coloured red and black - Earlier EU trade marks TOTTO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2020/C 313/39)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Essential Export SA (San José, Costa Rica) (represented by: A.B. Padial Martínez, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2019 (Case R 362/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Essential Export and Shenzhen Liouyi International Trading.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Essential Export SA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9856 – M&G Investment Management/Baring Asset Management/Tunstall Group Holdings) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 280/04
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, insurance company, investment company, merger control, software








C_2020280EN.01000401.xml










25.8.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 280/4






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9856 – M&G Investment Management/Baring Asset Management/Tunstall Group Holdings)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 280/04)
On 8 July 2020, 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 32020M9856. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-748/18: Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Glimarpol v EUIPO — Metar (Pneumatic power tool) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a pneumatic power tool — Earlier design — Proof of disclosure — Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Ground for invalidity — Individual character — Different overall impression — Article 6(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, drilling equipment, pneumatic machinery








C_2020339EN.01001301.xml










12.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/13






Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Glimarpol v EUIPO — Metar (Pneumatic power tool)
(Case T-748/18) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a pneumatic power tool - Earlier design - Proof of disclosure - Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Ground for invalidity - Individual character - Different overall impression - Article 6(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)
(2020/C 339/15)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Glimarpol sp. z o.o. (Bytom, Poland) (represented by: M. Kondrat, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Metar sp. z o.o. (Gliwice, Poland) (represented by: R. Skubisz and M. Mazurek, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 October 2018 (Case R 1615/2017-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Metar and Glimarpol.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Glimarpol sp. z o.o. to pay the costs;










3.


Orders Metar sp. z o.o. to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.
European Parliament decision of 8 July 2020 on the nomination of Helga Berger as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0129/2020 — 2020/0802(NLE))
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, European Parliament
Subjects: appointment of members, member of the Court of Auditors (EU)








C_2021371EN.01011601.xml










15.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 371/116






P9_TA(2020)0178
Nomination of Helga Berger as a Member of the Court of Auditors
European Parliament decision of 8 July 2020 on the nomination of Helga Berger as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C9-0129/2020 — 2020/0802(NLE))
(Consultation)
(2021/C 371/16)

The European Parliament,






—


having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C9-0129/2020),










—


having regard to Rule 129 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0126/2020),










A.


whereas Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control then proceeded to evaluate the credentials of the nominee, in particular in view of the requirements laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;










B.


whereas at its meeting of 25 June 2020 the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors;












1.


Delivers a favourable opinion on the Council’s nomination of Helga Berger as a Member of the Court of Auditors;












2.


Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, to the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.
Case T-38/19: Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Portugal v Commission (EAGF and EAFRD — Expenditure excluded from financing — Non-compliance with cross-compliance rules — Tolerance and leniency in sanctions — Flat-rate financial correction — Assessment of financial damage to the EU — Proportionality — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2020-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EAFRD, EAGF, agricultural expenditure, aid to agriculture, eligibility criteria, principle of proportionality, single payment scheme








C_2020339EN.01001401.xml










12.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 339/14






Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Portugal v Commission
(Case T-38/19) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Non-compliance with cross-compliance rules - Tolerance and leniency in sanctions - Flat-rate financial correction - Assessment of financial damage to the EU - Proportionality - Legitimate expectations)
(2020/C 339/16)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, P. Barros da Costa, J. Saraiva de Almeida and P. Estêvão, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Rechena and A. Sauka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1841 of 16 November 2018 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2018 L 298, p. 34).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.