do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-557/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Seven v EUIPO (7Seven) (EU trade mark — EU figurative mark 7Seven — No request for renewal of the registration of the trade mark — Cancellation of the mark on expiry of the registration — Article 53 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Application for restitutio in integrum submitted by a licensee — Article 104(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Duty of due care)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020390EN.01003401.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/34






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Seven v EUIPO (7Seven)
(Case T-557/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - EU figurative mark 7Seven - No request for renewal of the registration of the trade mark - Cancellation of the mark on expiry of the registration - Article 53 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Application for restitutio in integrum submitted by a licensee - Article 104(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Duty of due care)
(2020/C 390/48)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Seven SpA (Leinì, Italy) (represented by: L. Trevisan, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 June 2019 (Case R 2076/2018-5), relating to an application for restitutio in integrum of the right to request the renewal of the EU figurative mark 7Seven.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Seven SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.
Case T-737/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Huevos Herrera Mejías v EUIPO — Montesierra (MontiSierra HUEVOS CON SABOR A CAMPO) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark MontiSierra HUEVOS CON SABOR A CAMPO — Earlier EU and national word marks MONTESIERRA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity between goods — Similarity between signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, egg, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020390EN.01003601.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/36






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Huevos Herrera Mejías v EUIPO — Montesierra (MontiSierra HUEVOS CON SABOR A CAMPO)
(Case T-737/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark MontiSierra HUEVOS CON SABOR A CAMPO - Earlier EU and national word marks MONTESIERRA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity between goods - Similarity between signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)
(2020/C 390/51)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Huevos Herrera Mejías, SL (Torre Alháquime, Spain) (represented by: E. Manresa Medina, 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: Montesierra, SA (Jerez de la Frontera, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 September 2019 (Case R 2021/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Montesierra and Huevos Herrera Mejías.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Huevos Herrera Mejías, SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 23 September 2020 at 10:30-13:00 (CEST (Central European Summer Time (i.e. Brussels time).)) concerning a draft decision in Case AT.40299 – Closure Systems Rapporteur: Slovenia (Text with EEA relevance) 2021/C 40/04
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: EU competition policy, control of restrictive practices, exchange of information, motor car, price agreement, sanction (EU), trade information, vehicle parts








C_2021040EN.01000401.xml










5.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 40/4






Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 23 September 2020 at 10:30-13:00 (CEST (1)) concerning a draft decision in Case AT.40299 – Closure Systems
Rapporteur: Slovenia
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2021/C 40/04)

1.   

The Advisory Committee (8 Member States) agrees with the Commission that both sets of conduct covered by the draft decision constitute two separate single and continuous infringements consisting of anticompetitive agreements and/or concerted practices between undertakings with the object to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.



2.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment of the product and geographic scope for the single and continuous infringements contained in the draft decision.



3.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment as regards the duration of the infringements.



4.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's draft decision as regards the addressees in respect of the infringements.



5.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the infringements should be ordered to be brought to an end and that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision for the infringements in which they were involved.



6.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the calculation of the fines, based on the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation No 1/2003.



7.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice and the 2008 Settlement Notice.



8.   

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fine.



9.   

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.




(1)  Central European Summer Time (i.e. Brussels time).
Case C-455/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 23 September 2020 — Ts.M.Ts., T.M.M.
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carriage of passengers, civil aviation, consumer protection, indemnification, jurisdiction, right to justice








C_2021138EN.01001602.xml










19.4.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/16






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 23 September 2020 — Ts.M.Ts., T.M.M.
(Case C-455/20)
(2021/C 138/21)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Ts.M.Ts., T.M.M.
By order of 27 January 2021, the Court (Sixth Chamber) removed the case from the register.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9560 — Gränges/Impexmetal) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 427/03
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: air conditioning, aluminium, economic concentration, electric machinery, electronics, flat product, heating, merger control, motor vehicle industry, packaging product, supply








C_2020427EN.01000301.xml










10.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 427/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9560 — Gränges/Impexmetal)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 427/03)
On 23 September 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 32020M9560. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-522/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Aldi v EUIPO (BBQ BARBECUE SEASON) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU figurative mark BBQ BARBECUE SEASON — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, coal, condiment, household article, measuring equipment, metal product, paper, prepared foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020390EN.01003202.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/32






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Aldi v EUIPO (BBQ BARBECUE SEASON)
(Case T-522/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark BBQ BARBECUE SEASON - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2020/C 390/46)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher, C. Fürsen and M. Minkner, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 May 2019 (Case R 1359/2018-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign BBQ BARBECUE SEASON as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Aldi GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 305, 9.9.2019.
Case T-291/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Pshonka v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine — Freezing of funds — List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources — Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list — Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, ownership, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2020390EN.01002902.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/29






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Pshonka v Council
(Case T-291/19) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State was taken in accordance with the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)
(2020/C 390/41)
Language of the case: Czech

Parties


Applicant: Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by R. Pekař and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 7) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2019 L 64, p. 1), in so far as those acts maintain the applicant’s name on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/354 of 4 March 2019 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/352 of 4 March 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;










2.


Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 246, 22.7.2019.
Case T-314/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation v Commission (Arbitration clause — Grant agreement concluded in the framework of the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) — Development and testing of sensor systems for quality and performance control in baking processes — Bread-Guard Project — Overlap of the project with another project financed under the same programme — Changes to the description of the tasks to be undertaken — Loss of the intellectual property rights required for the execution of the project — Overestimation of the number of people needed each month for the project — Beneficiaries’ duty to provide information — Serious misconduct — Termination by the Commission of the grant agreement)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU financing, Framework Programme for Research and Development, bakery, bread-making, intellectual property, product quality, research and development, technological change








C_2020399EN.01003102.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/31






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation v Commission
(Case T-314/19) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Grant agreement concluded in the framework of the Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Development and testing of sensor systems for quality and performance control in baking processes - Bread-Guard Project - Overlap of the project with another project financed under the same programme - Changes to the description of the tasks to be undertaken - Loss of the intellectual property rights required for the execution of the project - Overestimation of the number of people needed each month for the project - Beneficiaries’ duty to provide information - Serious misconduct - Termination by the Commission of the grant agreement)
(2020/C 399/45)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation (San Sebastián, Spain) (represented by: P. Palacios Pesquera and M. Rius Coma, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà and S. Izquierdo Pérez, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 272 TFEU seeking a declaration that the Commission was not justified in terminating the grant agreement relating to the FP7-KBBE-2013-7-613647 BreadGuard Project

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Fundación Tecnalia Research & Innovation to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 230, 8.7.2019.
Case C-453/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře (Czech Republic) lodged on 23 September 2020 — CityRail a.s. v Správa železnic, státní organizace
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carriage of goods, charges for use of infrastructure, equal treatment, public sector, rail transport








C_2021062EN.01001201.xml










22.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 62/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře (Czech Republic) lodged on 23 September 2020 — CityRail a.s. v Správa železnic, státní organizace
(Case C-453/20)
(2021/C 62/13)
Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Úřad pro přístup k dopravní infrastruktuře

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: CityRail a.s.

Defendant: Správa železnic, státní organizace

Questions referred







1.


Does the place of loading and unloading for the transport of goods, including related tracks, constitute part of railway infrastructure as defined by Article 3(3) of Directive 2012/34? (1)











2.


Is it in accordance with Directive 2012/34 that an infrastructure manager may at any time change prices for the use of railway infrastructure or service facilities to the detriment of freight forwarders?










3.


Is Directive 2012/34 binding for Správa železnic, státní organizace (the Railway Administration) pursuant to Article 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?










4.


Can the rules set out in a network statement be deemed discriminatory if they are not consistent with the EU legislation to which the Railway Administration is obliged to adhere?






(1)  Directive 2012/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 establishing a single European railway area (OJ 2012 L 343, p. 32).
Case T-370/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Spain v Commission (External relations — Technical cooperation — Electronic communications — Regulation (EU) 2018/1971 — Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications — Article 35(2) of Regulation 2018/1971 — Participation of regulatory authorities of third countries in that body — Participation of the national regulatory authority of Kosovo — Concept of third country — Error of law)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, Kosovo, market supervision, public institution, regulation of telecommunications, technical cooperation, trans-European network, transmission network








C_2020390EN.01003102.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/31






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Spain v Commission
(Case T-370/19) (1)

(External relations - Technical cooperation - Electronic communications - Regulation (EU) 2018/1971 - Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications - Article 35(2) of Regulation 2018/1971 - Participation of regulatory authorities of third countries in that body - Participation of the national regulatory authority of Kosovo - Concept of third country - Error of law)
(2020/C 390/44)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Centeno Huerta, acting as Agent)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, M. Kellerbauer and T. Ramopoulos, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Commission of 18 March 2019 on the participation of the National Regulatory Authority of Kosovo in the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (OJ 2019 C 115, p. 26).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 263, 5.8.2019.
Case T-420/17: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Portigon v SRB (Economic and monetary union — Banking union — Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) — Single Resolution Fund (SRF) — Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions — Action for annulment — Direct and individual concern — Admissibility — Essential procedural requirements — Authentication of the decision — Obligation to state reasons — Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: company in difficulties, credit institution, equal treatment, financial instrument, financing plan, fund (EU), liquidation, right of establishment, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2020390EN.01002702.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/27






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Portigon v SRB
(Case T-420/17) (1)

(Economic and monetary union - Banking union - Single Resolution Mechanism for credit institutions and certain investment firms (SRM) - Single Resolution Fund (SRF) - Decision of the SRB on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions - Action for annulment - Direct and individual concern - Admissibility - Essential procedural requirements - Authentication of the decision - Obligation to state reasons - Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment)
(2020/C 390/38)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Portigon AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: D. Bliesener, V. Jungkind and F. Geber, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: P. Messina and J. Kerlin, acting as Agents, and B. Meyring, S. Schelo and T. Klupsch, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Steiblytė and K.-Ph. Wojcik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the decision of the Single Resolution Board in its executive session of 11 April 2017 on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/SRF/2017/05) in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) of 11 April 2017 on the calculation of the 2017 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/SRF/2017/05) in so far as it concerns Portigon AG;










2.


Orders the SRB to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Portigon;










3.


Orders the Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 277, 21.8.2017.