do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-645/18: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Bilbaína de Alquitranes v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Environment — Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures — Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: classification, damages, environmental impact, labelling, petroleum product, scientific progress, technological change, toxic substance, water pollutant








C_2021044EN.01004801.xml










8.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/48






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Bilbaína de Alquitranes v Commission
(Case T-645/18) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Environment - Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures - Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
(2021/C 44/70)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Bilbaína de Alquitranes, SA (Luchana-Baracaldo, Spain) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, M. Grunchard, S. Saez Moreno and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin, R. Lindenthal and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere and T. Zbihlej, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of the adoption of Commission Regulation (EU) No 944/2013 of 2 October 2013 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ 2013 L 261, p. 5), in so far as that regulation classified pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) and Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) substance.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Bilbaína de Alquitranes, SA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Case T-286/19: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Azarov 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: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person, right to justice, rights of the defence








C_2021053EN.01003402.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/34






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Azarov v Council
(Case T-286/19) (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)
(2021/C 53/45)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Mykola Yanovych Azarov (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: G. Lansky and A. Egger, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J. Van Blaaderen and P. Mahnič, 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 the applicant’s name was maintained 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. Mykola Yanovych Azarov 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 213, 24.6.2019.
Case T-93/18: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — International Skating Union v Commission (Competition — Association of undertakings — Speed skating events — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Regulations of a sports federation — Balance between competition law and the specific nature of the sport — Sports betting — Court of Arbitration for Sport — Guidelines on the calculation of fines — Scope of territorial application of Article 101 TFEU — Restriction of competition by object — Corrective measures)
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU competition policy, control of restrictive practices, court of arbitration, group of companies, professional sport, restriction on competition, sanction (EU), sporting event, sports body








C_2021062EN.01002402.xml










22.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 62/24






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — International Skating Union v Commission
(Case T-93/18) (1)

(Competition - Association of undertakings - Speed skating events - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Regulations of a sports federation - Balance between competition law and the specific nature of the sport - Sports betting - Court of Arbitration for Sport - Guidelines on the calculation of fines - Scope of territorial application of Article 101 TFEU - Restriction of competition by object - Corrective measures)
(2021/C 62/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: International Skating Union (Lausanne, Switzerland) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet, G. Meessen and F. van Schaik, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Mark Jan Hendrik Tuitert (Hoogmade, Netherlands), Niels Kerstholt (Zeist, Netherlands), European Elite Athletes Association (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: B. Braeken and J. Versteeg, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFUE for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 8230 final, adopted on 8 December 2017 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT/40208 — International Skating Union’s eligibility rules).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls Articles 2 and 4 of Commission Decision C(2017) 8230 final, adopted on 8 December 2017 relating to proceedings under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT/40208 — International Skating Unions’s eligibility rules), in so far as, by requiring the International Skating Union to put an end to the infringement established which is subject to a periodic penalty payment, the Commission refers to the arbitration rules and requires that they be amended in the event that the pre-authorisation system is maintained;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the International Skating Union and the European Commission to bear their own costs;










4.


Orders the European Elite Athletes Association, Mr Mark Jan Hendrik Tuitert and Mr Niels Kerstholt to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 142, 23.4.2018.
Case T-635/18: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Industrial Química del Nalón v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Environment — Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures — Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: classification, damages, environmental impact, labelling, petroleum product, scientific progress, technological change, toxic substance, water pollutant








C_2021044EN.01004401.xml










8.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/44






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Industrial Química del Nalón v Commission
(Case T-635/18) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Environment - Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures - Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
(2021/C 44/65)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Industrial Química del Nalón, SA (Oviedo, Spain) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, M. Grunchard, S. Saez Moreno and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin, R. Lindenthal and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä and W. Broere, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of the adoption of Commission Regulation (EU) No 944/2013 of 2 October 2013 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ 2013 L 261, p. 5), in so far as that regulation classified pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) and Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) substance.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Industrial Química del Nalón, SA, to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Case T-737/20: Action brought on 16 December 2020 — Ryanair v Commission
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Latvia, State aid, aid to undertakings, air transport, capital increase, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic








C_2021053EN.01005001.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/50






Action brought on 16 December 2020 — Ryanair v Commission
(Case T-737/20)
(2021/C 53/66)
Language of the case: English

Parties


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

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the European Commission’s decision (EU) of 3 July 2020 on State Aid SA.56943 (2020/N) — Latvia — COVID-19: Recapitalisation of airBaltic (1); and










—


order the European Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the European Commission misapplied Article 107(3)(b) TFEU and its communication Temporary framework for State aid measures to support the economy in the current COVID-19 outbreak and committed a manifest error of assessment by finding that the aid addresses a serious disturbance in the Latvian economy, that airBaltic is eligible to aid, and that the conditions regarding distortions to competition, the State’s exit and restructuring were satisfied, by violating its obligation to weigh the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition (i.e., the ‘balancing test’), and by finding that airBaltic had no significant market power.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the decision violates specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law that have underpinned the liberalisation of air transport in the EU since the late 1980s (i.e., non-discrimination, free provision of services and free establishment).










3.


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










4.


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






(1)  OJ 2020, C 346/1, p. 2
Case T-243/18: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — VW v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Surviving spouse — Survivor’s pension — Articles 18 and 20 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations — Conditions for eligibility — Duration of the marriage — Plea of illegality — Equal treatment — Principle of proportionality)
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, equal treatment, married person, principle of proportionality, staff regulations (EU), survivor's benefit








C_2021053EN.01003201.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/32






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — VW v Commission
(Case T-243/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Surviving spouse - Survivor’s pension - Articles 18 and 20 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Conditions for eligibility - Duration of the marriage - Plea of illegality - Equal treatment - Principle of proportionality)
(2021/C 53/41)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: VW (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: D. Boytha and J. Steele, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking the annulment of the decision of the Commission of 26 June 2017 dismissing the applicant’s application for a survivor’s pension and, in so far as is necessary, of the decision rejecting the complaint against that decision of 19 January 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the European Commission of 26 June 2017 dismissing VW’s application for a survivor’s pension;










2.


Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by VW;










3.


Orders the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 231, 2.7.2018.
Case T-430/18: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — American Airlines v Commission (Competition — Concentrations — Air transport market — Decision declaring a concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement — Commitments — Decision granting Grandfathering rights — Error of law — Concept of appropriate use)
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: air transport, economic concentration, merger control








C_2021053EN.01003202.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/32






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — American Airlines v Commission
(Case T-430/18) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Air transport market - Decision declaring a concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Commitments - Decision granting Grandfathering rights - Error of law - Concept of appropriate use)
(2021/C 53/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: American Airlines, Inc. (Fort Worth, Texas, United States) (represented by: J.-P. Poitras, Solicitor, J. Ruiz Calzado and J. Wileur, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Franchoo, H. Leupold and L. Wildpanner, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Delta Air Lines, Inc. (Wilmington, Delaware (United States) (represented by: M. Demetriou, QC, C. Angeli and I. Giles, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 2788 final of 30 April 2018 granting Grandfathering rights to Delta Air Lines (Case M.6607 — US Airways/American Airlines).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders American Airlines, Inc. to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders Delta Air Lines, Inc. to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 319, 10.9.2018.
Case T-636/18: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Tokai erftcarbon v Commission (Non-contractual liability — Environment — Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures — Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
Date: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: classification, damages, environmental impact, labelling, petroleum product, scientific progress, technological change, toxic substance, water pollutant








C_2021044EN.01004501.xml










8.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 44/45






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Tokai erftcarbon v Commission
(Case T-636/18) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Environment - Classification, labelling and packaging of certain substances and mixtures - Classification of pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) toxic substance and as an Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) toxic substance - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
(2021/C 44/66)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Tokai erftcarbon GmbH (Grevenbroich, Germany) (represented by: K. Van Maldegem, M. Grunchard, S. Saez Moreno and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wilderspin, R. Lindenthal and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä and W. Broere, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of the adoption of Commission Regulation (EU) No 944/2013 of 2 October 2013 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (OJ 2013 L 261, p. 5), in so far as that regulation classified pitch, coal tar, high-temp as an Aquatic Acute 1 (H400) and Aquatic Chronic 1 (H410) substance.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Tokai erftcarbon GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.
Case T-859/19: Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Alkemie Group v EUIPO — Mann & Schröder (ALKEMIE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark ALKEMIE — Earlier EU word mark Alkmene — Relative ground 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: 2020-12-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2021053EN.01003701.xml










15.2.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 53/37






Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Alkemie Group v EUIPO — Mann & Schröder (ALKEMIE)
(Case T-859/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ALKEMIE - Earlier EU word mark Alkmene - Relative ground 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))
(2021/C 53/49)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Alkemie Group sp. z o.o. (Gdynia, Poland) (represented by: A. Korbela, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mann & Schröder GmbH (Siegelsbach, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 September 2019 (Case R 2230/2018-2) regarding opposition proceedings between Mann & Schröder and Alkemie Group.

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 16 September 2019 (Case R 2230/2018-2) to the extent that it dismissed Alkemie Group sp. z o.o’s action in respect of ‘dietary aids’ in Class 5;










2.


Dismisses the action for the remainder;










3.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.