do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-215/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Fidia farmaceutici v EUIPO — Ioulia and Irene Tseti Pharmaceutical Laboratories (HYAL) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark HYAL — Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Absolute ground for refusal — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Audi alteram partem rule — Obligation to state reasons — Sound administration and equal treatment — Article 165(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, cosmetic product, dietary product, pharmaceutical product, plant health product, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2021310EN.01002401.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/24






Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Fidia farmaceutici v EUIPO — Ioulia and Irene Tseti Pharmaceutical Laboratories (HYAL)
(Case T-215/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark HYAL - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Absolute ground for refusal - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Audi alteram partem rule - Obligation to state reasons - Sound administration and equal treatment - Article 165(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2021/C 310/30)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Fidia farmaceutici SpA (Abano Terme, Italy) (represented by: R. Kunz-Hallstein and H.P. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Sliwinska, V. Ruzek and H. O’Neill, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ioulia and Irene Tseti Pharmaceutical Laboratories SA (Athens, Greece) (represented by: C. Chrysanthis, P.-V. Chardalia and A. Vasilogamvrou, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 January 2020 (Case R 613/2019-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Ioulia and Irene Tseti Pharmaceutical Laboratories and Fidia farmaceutici.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Fidia farmaceutici SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Case T-423/20: Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT9) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark GT9 — Earlier EU figurative mark GT — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Relevant public — Level of attention — Action manifestly well founded)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, electronic device, electronic game, micro-computer, mobile phone, registered trade mark, retail trade, software, trade-mark law








C_2021310EN.01003102.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/31






Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT9)
(Case T-423/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark GT9 - Earlier EU figurative mark GT - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Relevant public - Level of attention - Action manifestly well founded)
(2021/C 310/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and M. Maier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1610/2019 4), relating to opposition proceedings between Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe and Huawei Technologies.

Operative part of the order







1.


The decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1610/2019-4) is annulled.










2.


EUIPO shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.
Joined Cases C-456/20 P to C-458/20 P: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 June 2021 — Crédit agricole SA (C-456/20 P), Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (C-457/20 P), CA Consumer Finance (C-458/20 P) v European Central Bank (Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Economic and monetary policy — Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 — Article 18(1) — Prudential supervision of credit institutions — Conferral of specific tasks on the European Central Bank (ECB) — Infliction of an administrative financial penalty for breach of prudential requirements — Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 — Article 26(3) — Own funds requirements — Capital instruments — Issuance of ordinary shares — Classification as Common Equity Tier 1 (CET 1) — No prior authorisation by the competent authority — Negligent breach)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU banking union, banking supervision, credit institution, economic policy, financial requirements, financial supervision, monetary policy, powers of the institutions (EU), sanction (EU), share








C_2021357EN.01000501.xml










6.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 357/5






Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 June 2021 — Crédit agricole SA (C-456/20 P), Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (C-457/20 P), CA Consumer Finance (C-458/20 P) v European Central Bank
(Joined Cases C-456/20 P to C-458/20 P) (1)

(Appeal - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Economic and monetary policy - Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Article 18(1) - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Conferral of specific tasks on the European Central Bank (ECB) - Infliction of an administrative financial penalty for breach of prudential requirements - Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 - Article 26(3) - Own funds requirements - Capital instruments - Issuance of ordinary shares - Classification as Common Equity Tier 1 (CET 1) - No prior authorisation by the competent authority - Negligent breach)
(2021/C 357/06)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Appellants: Crédit agricole SA (C-456/20 P), Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (C-457/20 P), CA Consumer Finance (C-458/20 P) (represented by: A. Champsaur and A. Delors, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank (represented by: C. Hernández Saseta, A. Pizzolla and D. Segoin, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order







1.


The appeals are dismissed as in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded.










2.


Crédit agricole SA, Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank and CA Consumer Finance shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Case T-196/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Chanel v EUIPO — Innovative Cosmetic Concepts (INCOCO) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark INCOCO — Earlier national word marks COCO — 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: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, cosmetics industry, hairdressing and beauty care, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2021310EN.01002302.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/23






Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Chanel v EUIPO — Innovative Cosmetic Concepts (INCOCO)
(Case T-196/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark INCOCO - Earlier national word marks COCO - 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 310/29)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Chanel (Neuilly sur-Seine, France) (represented by: J. Passa, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Pétrequin, J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Innovative Cosmetic Concepts LLC (Clifton, New Jersey, United States) (represented by: I. Temiño Ceniceros, J. Oria Sousa-Montes and P. Revuelta Martos, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 January 2020 (Case R 194/2019-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Chanel and Innovative Cosmetic Concepts.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 January 2020 (Case R 194/2019-1);










2.


Orders EUIPO and Innovative Cosmetic Concepts LLC to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Case T-481/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Magnetec v EUIPO (CoolTUBE) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark CoolTUBE — Absolute ground for refusal — Distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electric cable, insulator, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vehicle parts








C_2021310EN.01002601.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/26






Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Magnetec v EUIPO (CoolTUBE)
(Case T-481/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark CoolTUBE - Absolute ground for refusal - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2021/C 310/33)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Magnetec — Gesellschaft für Magnettechnologie mbH (Langenselbold, Germany) (represented by: M. Kloth, R. Briske and D. Habel, lawyers)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2020 (Case R 1755/2019-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign CoolTUBE as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 15 May 2020 (Case R 1755/2019-1);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Magnetec — Gesellschaft für Magnettechnologie mbH, including the costs necessarily incurred for the purposes of the appeal proceedings before the Board of Appeal.






(1)  OJ C 304, 14.9.2020.
Case T-415/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — KT v EIB (Civil service — EIB staff — Disciplinary proceedings — Summary dismissal for grave misconduct — Rights of the defence — Hearing of witnesses — Delegation of power — Preparation of the contested decision — Reasonable period of time — Impartiality — Protection of personal data — Proportionality)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: data protection, disciplinary proceedings, dismissal, personal data, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2021310EN.01002502.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/25






Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — KT v EIB
(Case T-415/20) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Disciplinary proceedings - Summary dismissal for grave misconduct - Rights of the defence - Hearing of witnesses - Delegation of power - Preparation of the contested decision - Reasonable period of time - Impartiality - Protection of personal data - Proportionality)
(2021/C 310/32)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: KT (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: K. Carr and M. Loizou, acting as Agents, and by A. Duron, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union seeking the annulment of the decision of the EIB of 24 March 2020 imposing on the applicant, as a disciplinary penalty, summary dismissal for grave misconduct, without notice and with a severance grant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders KT to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Investment Bank (EIB).






(1)  OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.
Case T-187/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Davide Groppi v EUIPO — Viabizzuno (Table lamp) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a table lamp — Earlier Community design — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, lighting equipment








C_2021310EN.01002301.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/23






Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Davide Groppi v EUIPO — Viabizzuno (Table lamp)
(Case T-187/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a table lamp - Earlier Community design - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
(2021/C 310/28)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Davide Groppi Srl (Piacenza, Italy) (represented by: F. Boscariol de Roberto, D. Capra and V. Malerba, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Viabizzuno Srl (Bentivoglio, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 January 2020 (Case R 126/2019-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Viabizzuno and Davide Groppi.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders David Groppi Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.
Case T-422/20: Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT5) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark GT5 — Earlier EU figurative mark GT — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Relevant public — Level of attention — Action manifestly well founded)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, electronic device, electronic game, micro-computer, mobile phone, registered trade mark, retail trade, software, trade-mark law








C_2021310EN.01003101.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/31






Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT5)
(Case T-422/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark GT5 - Earlier EU figurative mark GT - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Relevant public - Level of attention - Action manifestly well founded)
(2021/C 310/40)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and M. Maier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1600/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe and Huawei Technologies.

Operative part of the order







1.


The decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1600/2019-4) is annulled.










2.


EUIPO shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.
Case T-420/20: Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT8) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark GT8 — Earlier EU figurative mark GT — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Relevant public — Level of attention — Action manifestly well founded)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, electronic device, electronic game, micro-computer, mobile phone, registered trade mark, retail trade, software, trade-mark law








C_2021310EN.01002902.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/29






Order of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe v EUIPO — Huawei Technologies (GT8)
(Case T-420/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark GT8 - Earlier EU figurative mark GT - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Relevant public - Level of attention - Action manifestly well founded)
(2021/C 310/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and M. Maier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (Shenzhen, China)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1611/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe and Huawei Technologies.

Operative part of the order







1.


The decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 April 2020 (Case R 1611/2019-4) is annulled.










2.


EUIPO shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd.






(1)  OJ C 287, 31.8.2020.
Case T-487/20: Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Rezon v EUIPO (imot.bg) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU figurative mark imot.bg — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of distinctiveness — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons — First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Partial confirmatory decision)
Date: 2021-06-16
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer network, consultancy, provision of services, registered trade mark, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2021310EN.01002602.xml










2.8.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 310/26






Judgment of the General Court of 16 June 2021 — Rezon v EUIPO (imot.bg)
(Case T-487/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark imot.bg - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctiveness - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Partial confirmatory decision)
(2021/C 310/34)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: Rezon OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: M. Yordanova Harizanova, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard Monguiral and P. Angelova Georgieva, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2020 (Case R 2270/2019-1), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign imot.bg as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rezon OOD to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 5.10.2020.