do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-677/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Polfarmex v EUIPO — Kaminski (SYRENA) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark SYRENA — Genuine use of the mark — Extent of use — Proof of use — Articles 18(1) and 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Duty to state reasons — First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor car, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020399EN.01003502.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/35






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Polfarmex v EUIPO — Kaminski (SYRENA)
(Case T-677/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark SYRENA - Genuine use of the mark - Extent of use - Proof of use - Articles 18(1) and 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Duty to state reasons - First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2020/C 399/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Polfarmex S.A. (Kutno, Poland) (represented by: B. Matusiewicz-Kulig, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Arkadiusz Kaminski (Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada) (represented by: E. Pijewska, M. Mazurek and W. Trybowski, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2019 (Joined Cases R 1861/2018-2 and R 1840/2018-2), relating to revocation proceedings between Polfarmex and Mr Kaminski.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 11 July 2019 (Joined Cases R 1861/2018-2 and R 1840/2018-2) to the extent that it upheld the registration of the European Union trade mark No 9262767 in respect of ‘cars’ in Class 12 other than ‘racing cars’;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.
Case T-251/16: Order of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Director-General of OLAF v Commission
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Protocol (EU), infringement of EU law, interinstitutional relations (EU), managing director, powers of the institutions (EU)








C_2020390EN.01005101.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/51






Order of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Director-General of OLAF v Commission
(Case T-251/16) (1)

(2020/C 390/68)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.
Case T-608/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Veronese Design Company v EUIPO — Veronese (VERONESE) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark VERONESE — Earlier EU word mark VERONESE — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, ceramics, earths and stones, glass, plastics, registered trade mark, sculpture, trade-mark law, trading operation, wood product








C_2020399EN.01003401.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/34






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Veronese Design Company v EUIPO — Veronese (VERONESE)
(Case T-608/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark VERONESE - Earlier EU word mark VERONESE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2020/C 399/49)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Veronese Design Company Ltd (Kowloon, Hong Kong) (represented by: B. Lafont, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Veronese SAS (Paris, France) (represented by: S. Herrburger, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 June 2019 (Case R 2434/2018-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Veronese and Veronese Design Company.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 June 2019 (Case R 2434/2018-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Veronese SAS and Veronese Design Company Ltd;










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Veronese Design Company;










3.


Orders Veronese to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 372, 4.11.2019.
Case T-433/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 –Bax v ECB (Civil service — ECB staff — Career transition support — Eligibility — Legal certainty — Equal treatment — Legitimate expectations — Duty of care — Discrimination on grounds of sex — Proportionality — Liability)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, equal treatment, outplacement, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, servant (EU), sexual discrimination








C_2020399EN.01002901.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/29






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 –Bax v ECB
(Case T-433/18) (1)

(Civil service - ECB staff - Career transition support - Eligibility - Legal certainty - Equal treatment - Legitimate expectations - Duty of care - Discrimination on grounds of sex - Proportionality - Liability)
(2020/C 399/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Annemieke Bax (Frankfurt, Germany) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: F. Malfrère and D. Camilleri Podestà, acting as Agents, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union for the annulment of, first, the decision of the ECB of 14 December 2017 rejecting the applicant’s application for career transition support and, in so far as necessary, the decision of the ECB of 8 May 2018 dismissing the applicant’s special appeal against the abovementioned decision of 14 December 2017 and, second, for compensation for the non-material damage which the applicant claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 328, 17.9.2018.
Case T-36/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — PE Digital v EUIPO — Spark Networks Services (ElitePartner) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Figurative EU trade mark ElitePartner — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business administration, business management, human relations, information technology industry, legal aid, provision of services, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020399EN.01003002.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/30






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — PE Digital v EUIPO — Spark Networks Services (ElitePartner)
(Case T-36/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Figurative EU trade mark ElitePartner - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)
(2020/C 399/43)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: PE Digital GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

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, intervener before the General Court: Spark Networks Services GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: C. Brennecke and J. Gräbig, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 October 2018 (Case R 614/2017-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Spark Networks Services and PE Digital.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders PE Digital GmbH to pay the costs, including those incurred by Spark Networks Services GmbH in the proceedings before the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).






(1)  OJ C 93, 11. 3. 2019.
Case T-401/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Brillux v EUIPO — Synthesa Chemie (Freude an Farbe) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark Freude an Farbe in yellow, orange, red, pink, violet, blue, turquoise, dark green, light green and anthracite — Earlier figurative EU trade mark Glemadur Freude an Farbe — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, building technique, painting, paints and varnishes, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2020399EN.01003201.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/32






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Brillux v EUIPO — Synthesa Chemie (Freude an Farbe)
(Case T-401/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Freude an Farbe in yellow, orange, red, pink, violet, blue, turquoise, dark green, light green and anthracite - Earlier figurative EU trade mark Glemadur Freude an Farbe - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2020/C 399/46)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Brillux GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany) (represented by: R. Schiffer, 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, intervener before the General Court: Synthesa Chemie GesmbH (Perg, Austria) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2019 (Case R 1498/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Synthesa Chemie and Brillux.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


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






(1)  OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.
Case T-408/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis v EACEA (Arbitration clause — Grant agreement entered into under Erasmus Mundus action programme No 3 for the promotion of higher education — Grant agreement entered into under the programme for lifelong learning — Eligible costs — Debit notes — Repayment of part of the sums advanced — Contractual liability)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, continuing education, contractual liability, debt, financial aid, higher education, reimbursement of aid








C_2020399EN.01002801.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/28






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis v EACEA
(Case T-408/18) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Grant agreement entered into under Erasmus Mundus action programme No 3 for the promotion of higher education - Grant agreement entered into under the programme for lifelong learning - Eligible costs - Debit notes - Repayment of part of the sums advanced - Contractual liability)
(2020/C 399/39)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (represented by: H. Monet and P. Kalyva, acting as Agents, and G. Dellis, K. Sakellariou and A. Chasapopoulos, lawyers)

Re:

Action under Article 272 TFEU seeking, first, a declaration that the debts set out in debit notes with reference numbers 3241804682 and 3241804913 of 9 and 16 April 2018 issued by the EACEA against the applicant represent eligible costs of EUR 28 976,83 and EUR 77 169,78, respectively, and, second, an order that the EACEA repay those sums to the applicant, together with default interest.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 319, 10.9.2018.
Case T-596/18: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — ZL v EUIPO (Civil service — Recruitment — Notice of competition — Decision not to place the applicant’s name on the reserve list for the competition — Obligation to state reasons — Rejection of the request for access to the multiple-choice questions asked in the admission tests — Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings)
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, administrative competition, administrative transparency, administrator, competition (EU), equal treatment, rights of the defence








C_2020390EN.01002901.xml










16.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 390/29






Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — ZL v EUIPO
(Case T-596/18) (1)

(Civil service - Recruitment - Notice of competition - Decision not to place the applicant’s name on the reserve list for the competition - Obligation to state reasons - Rejection of the request for access to the multiple-choice questions asked in the admission tests - Secrecy of the selection board’s proceedings)
(2020/C 390/40)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZL (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė and K. Tóth, acting as Agents, assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment, first, of the decision of 7 March 2018 of the selection board for competition EUIPO/AD/01/17 — Administrators (AD 6) in the field of intellectual property rejecting the applicant’s request for review of that selection board’s decision of 1 December 2017 not to place her name on the reserve list drawn up with a view to the recruitment of administrators by EUIPO and, secondly, of EUIPO’s decision of 27 June 2018 rejecting her complaints.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders ZL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 445, 10.12.2018.