do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-677/20: Action brought on 13 November 2020 — Ryanair and Laudamotion v Commission
Date: 2020-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Austria, State aid, carriage of passengers, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic, equal treatment, freedom to provide services, low cost airline, right of establishment








C_2021009EN.01003102.xml










11.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 9/31






Action brought on 13 November 2020 — Ryanair and Laudamotion v Commission
(Case T-677/20)
(2021/C 9/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) and Laudamotion GmbH (Schwechat, Austria) (represented by: E. Vahida, F. Laprévote, V. Blanc, S. Rating and I. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


annul the European Commission’s decision (EU) of 6 July 2020 on State Aid SA.57539 (2020/N) — Austria — COVID-19 — Aid to Austrian Airlines (1); and










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.




The applicants have also requested that their action be determined under the expedited procedure as referred to in Article 23a of the Statute of the Court of Justice.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on five pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the European Commission failed to review possible aid to or from Lufthansa.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the European Commission violated specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law regarding the prohibition of discrimination, free provision of services and free establishment that have underpinned the liberalisation of the air transport market in the EU. The liberalisation of air transport has allowed the growth of truly pan-European low-fares airlines. By authorising Austria to reserve the aid to Austrian Airlines, the European Commission ignored the damage caused to such pan-European airlines by the travel restrictions due to the COVID-19 crisis.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the European Commission misapplied Article 107(2)(b) TFEU and committed manifest errors of assessment in its review of the proportionality of the aid to the damage caused by the travel restrictions due to the COVID-19 crisis, particularly by considering that all the damage caused by the COVID-19 crisis to AUA was the direct effect of travel restrictions and not verifying whether Austrian Airlines had mitigated all the avoidable costs.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the European Commission failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite serious difficulties and violated the applicants’ procedural rights.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the European Commission violated its duty to state reasons.






(1)  European Commission’s decision (EU) of 6 July 2020 on State Aid SA.57539 (2020/N) — Austria — COVID-19 — Aid to Austrian Airlines (OJ 2020 C 346, p. 2)
Case T-679/20: Action brought on 13 November 2020 — Dr. August Wolff v EUIPO — Combe International (Vagisan)
Date: 2020-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2021019EN.01006301.xml










18.1.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 19/63






Action brought on 13 November 2020 — Dr. August Wolff v EUIPO — Combe International (Vagisan)
(Case T-679/20)
(2021/C 19/68)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Dr. August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel (Bielefeld, Germany) (represented by: A. Thünken, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Combe International Ltd (New York, New York, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark Vagisan — International registration designating the European Union No 10 985 168

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 September 2020 in Case R 2459/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


annul the decision of the Cancellation Division of the EUIPO No 000018101 C of 11 September 2019,










—


order the EUIPO and, as the case may be, the intervener to bear the costs of the proceedings and the costs incurred by proceedings before the EUIPO.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.