do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-540/21: Action brought on 2 September 2021 — Vivostore v EUIPO — Linda (VIVO LIFE)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, protein products, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2021431EN.01005001.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/50






Action brought on 2 September 2021 — Vivostore v EUIPO — Linda (VIVO LIFE)
(Case T-540/21)
(2021/C 431/58)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Vivostore Ltd (Winscombe, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. Urek, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Linda AG (Cologne, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark VIVO LIFE — Application for registration No 18 049 468

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 July 2021 in Case R 1587/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul or vary the contested decision and uphold the decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO in Case B 3 090 390 of 16 July 2020;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-5/20: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V. v Vodafone GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Electronic communications — Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 — Article 3 — Open internet access — Article 3(1) — End users’ rights — Article 3(2) — Prohibition of agreements and commercial practices limiting the exercise of end users’ rights — Article 3(3) — Obligation of equal and non-discriminatory treatment of traffic — Possibility of implementing reasonable traffic management measures — Additional ‘zero tariff’ option — Limitation on tethering)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet, consumer protection, equal treatment, information technology user, peripheral, regulation of telecommunications, transmission network








C_2021462EN.01001301.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/13






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V. v Vodafone GmbH
(Case C-5/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Electronic communications - Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 - Article 3 - Open internet access - Article 3(1) - End users’ rights - Article 3(2) - Prohibition of agreements and commercial practices limiting the exercise of end users’ rights - Article 3(3) - Obligation of equal and non-discriminatory treatment of traffic - Possibility of implementing reasonable traffic management measures - Additional ‘zero tariff’ option - Limitation on tethering)
(2021/C 462/11)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V.

Defendant: Vodafone GmbH

Interested party: Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 laying down measures concerning open internet access and amending Directive 2002/22/EC on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services and Regulation (EU) No 531/2012 on roaming on public mobile communications networks within the Union must be interpreted as meaning that a limitation on tethering, on account of the activation of a ‘zero tariff’ option, is incompatible with the obligations arising from Article 3(3).


(1)  OJ C 137, 27.4.2020.
State aid – Decision to raise no objections 2021/C 352/07
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic








C_2021352EN.01000701.xml










2.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/7






State aid – Decision to raise no objections
(2021/C 352/07)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:






Date of adoption of the decision


21 May 2021




Case No


86850




Decision No


057/21/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Title


COVID-19 renewal and amendments to the aid scheme for undertakings suffering a substantial loss of turnover




Legal basis


Act on the temporary subsidy scheme for enterprises with a significant reduction in turnover after August 2020




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Compensate losses and thereby limit the damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic




Form of aid


Grants




Budget


Estimated NOK 4 billion




Intensity


70-90 %




Duration


Until 31 October 2021




Economic sectors


All sectors except for companies engaged in petroleum extraction and production, companies engaged in production, transmission, distribution and trade of electric power, financial institutions and companies whose main purpose is investment activities




Name and address of the granting authority







The Brønnøysund Register Centre




Brønnøysundregistrene




Postboks 900




N-8910 Brønnøysund




NORWAY








The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/
Case C-66/20: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Procura della Repubblica di Trento — Italy) — Proceedings relating to the recognition and execution of a European Investigation Order (EIO) concerning XK (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 267 TFEU — Definition of ‘court or tribunal of a Member State’ — Criteria — Procura della Repubblica di Trento (Public Prosecutor’s Office, Trento, Italy) — Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU police cooperation, competence of the institution, criminal proceedings, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, judicial investigation, public prosecutor's department








C_2021462EN.01001801.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/18






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Procura della Repubblica di Trento — Italy) — Proceedings relating to the recognition and execution of a European Investigation Order (EIO) concerning XK
(Case C-66/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 267 TFEU - Definition of ‘court or tribunal of a Member State’ - Criteria - Procura della Repubblica di Trento (Public Prosecutor’s Office, Trento, Italy) - Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)
(2021/C 462/16)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Procura della Repubblica di Trento

Parties to the main proceedings

XK

Intervening party: Finanzamt für Steuerstrafsachen und Steuerfahndung Münster

Operative part of the judgment

The request for a preliminary ruling from the Procura della Repubblica di Trento (Public Prosecutor’s Office, Trento, Italy), made by decision of 15 January 2020, is inadmissible.


(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
Case C-350/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte costituzionale — Italy) — O.D. and Others v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2011/98/EU — Rights for third-country workers who hold single permits — Article 12 — Right to equal treatment — Social security — Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 — Coordination of social security systems — Article 3 — Maternity and paternity benefits — Family benefits — Legislation of a Member State excluding third-country nationals holding a single permit from entitlement to a childbirth allowance and a maternity allowance)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: equal treatment, family benefit, foreign national, maternity benefit, migrant worker, residence permit, social security legislation, work permit








C_2021462EN.01002101.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/21






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte costituzionale — Italy) — O.D. and Others v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS)
(Case C-350/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2011/98/EU - Rights for third-country workers who hold single permits - Article 12 - Right to equal treatment - Social security - Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 - Coordination of social security systems - Article 3 - Maternity and paternity benefits - Family benefits - Legislation of a Member State excluding third-country nationals holding a single permit from entitlement to a childbirth allowance and a maternity allowance)
(2021/C 462/21)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte costituzionale

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: O.D., R.I.H.V., B.O., F.G., M.K.F.B., E.S., N.P, S.E.A.

Defendant: Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS)

Intervener: Presidenza dei Consiglio dei Ministri

Operative part of the judgment

Article 12(1)(e) of Directive 2011/98/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on a single application procedure for a single permit for third-country nationals to reside and work in the territory of a Member State and on a common set of rights for third-country workers legally residing in a Member State must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which excludes the third-country nationals referred to in Article 3(1)(b) and (c) of that directive from entitlement to a childbirth allowance and a maternity allowance provided for by that legislation.


(1)  OJ C 329, 5.10.2020.
Case C-930/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil du contentieux des étrangers — Belgium) — X v Belgian State (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2004/38/EC — Article 13(2) — Right of residence of family members of a Union citizen — Marriage between a Union citizen and a third-country national — Retention, in the event of divorce, of the right of residence by a third-country national who is the victim of acts of domestic violence committed by his or her spouse — Requirement to demonstrate the existence of sufficient resources — No such requirement in Directive 2003/86/EC — Validity — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Articles 20 and 21 — Equal treatment — Difference in treatment based on whether the sponsor is a Union citizen or a third-country national — Non-comparability of situations)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: divorce, domestic violence, equal treatment, family reunification, foreign national, marriage, residence permit








C_2021431EN.01002401.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/24






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil du contentieux des étrangers — Belgium) — X v Belgian State
(Case C-930/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2004/38/EC - Article 13(2) - Right of residence of family members of a Union citizen - Marriage between a Union citizen and a third-country national - Retention, in the event of divorce, of the right of residence by a third-country national who is the victim of acts of domestic violence committed by his or her spouse - Requirement to demonstrate the existence of sufficient resources - No such requirement in Directive 2003/86/EC - Validity - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Articles 20 and 21 - Equal treatment - Difference in treatment based on whether the sponsor is a Union citizen or a third-country national - Non-comparability of situations)
(2021/C 431/25)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil du contentieux des étrangers

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: X

Defendant: Belgian State

Operative part of the judgment

The consideration of the question referred by the national court has disclosed no factor of a kind such as to affect the validity of Article 13(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC, in the light of Article 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.


(1)  OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.
Case C-928/19 P: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 September 2021 — European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) v European Commission, Jan Willem Goudriaan (Appeal — Law governing the institutions — Social policy — Articles 154 and 155 TFEU — Social dialogue between management and labour at EU level — Informing and consulting civil servants and employees of central government administrations of the Member States — Agreement concluded between the social partners — Joint request of the signatories to that agreement seeking its implementation at EU level — Refusal of the European Commission to submit a proposal for a decision to the Council of the European Union — Standard of judicial review — Obligation to state reasons for the decision refusing to submit the proposal)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Council of the European Union, admissibility, central government, legislative act (EU), operation of the Institutions, social dialogue, social partners, social policy








C_2021431EN.01002302.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/23






Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 September 2021 — European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) v European Commission, Jan Willem Goudriaan
(Case C-928/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Law governing the institutions - Social policy - Articles 154 and 155 TFEU - Social dialogue between management and labour at EU level - Informing and consulting civil servants and employees of central government administrations of the Member States - Agreement concluded between the social partners - Joint request of the signatories to that agreement seeking its implementation at EU level - Refusal of the European Commission to submit a proposal for a decision to the Council of the European Union - Standard of judicial review - Obligation to state reasons for the decision refusing to submit the proposal)
(2021/C 431/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) (represented by: R. Arthur, Solicitor, and K. Apps, Barrister)

Other parties to the proceedings: Jan Willem Goudriaan (represented by: R. Arthur, Solicitor, and K. Apps, Barrister), European Commission (represented by: I. Martínez del Peral, M. Kellerbauer and B.R. Killmann, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.
Case C-169/20: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Article 110 TFEU — Internal taxation — Discriminatory taxation — Prohibition — Second-hand vehicles imported from other Member States — Component of the registration tax calculated on the basis of carbon dioxide emissions — Failure to take into account the depreciation of the vehicle)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: domestic market, import, import tax, infringement of EU law, motor vehicle, motor vehicle pollution, used goods, vehicle tax








C_2021462EN.01001901.xml










15.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 462/19






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic
(Case C-169/20) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 110 TFEU - Internal taxation - Discriminatory taxation - Prohibition - Second-hand vehicles imported from other Member States - Component of the registration tax calculated on the basis of carbon dioxide emissions - Failure to take into account the depreciation of the vehicle)
(2021/C 462/18)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Applicant: European Commission (represented by: initially, M. França and C. Perrin, and, subsequently, G. Braga da Cruz and C. Perrin, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, N. Vitorino, A. Pimenta, P. Barros da Costa and S. Jaulino, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Declares that, by excluding the depreciation of the environmental component in the calculation of the applicable value of second-hand vehicles put into circulation in the Portuguese territory and purchased in another Member State when calculating the vehicle tax as provided for by the Código do imposto sobre veículos (code covering vehicle tax), as amended by the lei 71/2018 (Law No 71/2018), the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 110 TFEU;










2.


Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.
State aid – Decision to raise no objections 2021/C 352/06
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: EFTA Surveillance Authority
Subjects: European Economic Area, Norway, State aid, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic, package travel








C_2021352EN.01000601.xml










2.9.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 352/6






State aid – Decision to raise no objections
(2021/C 352/06)
The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:






Date of adoption of the decision


26 May 2021




Case No


86853




Decision No


070/21/COL




EFTA State


Norway




Title


COVID-19 Reinsurance scheme for package travel guarantees




Legal basis


Parliamentary Decision authorising the main conditions of the measure




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Providing access to (affordable) package travel guarantees for package travel organisers




Form of aid


Guarantees




Budget


NOK 525 million




Intensity


The scheme covers 50 % of the losses that can be incurred by insurers under guarantees provided to package travel organisers.




Duration


26.5.2021 – 31.12.2021




Economic sectors


Package travel sector (potential indirect aid to banks and insurance companies providing package travel guarantees)




Name and address of the granting authority







Garantiinstituttet for eksportkreditt - GIEK




Postboks 1763 Vika




N-0122 Oslo




NORWAY








The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/
Case T-546/21: Action brought on 2 September 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services)
Date: 2021-09-02
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, anti-pollution device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wastewater, water treatment








C_2021422EN.01003402.xml










18.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 422/34






Action brought on 2 September 2021 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services)
(Case T-546/21)
(2021/C 422/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Rochem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rochem Marine Srl (Genoa, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services — European Union trade mark No 12 326 609

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 June 2021 in Case R 1544/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


stay the proceeding until a final judgement has been taken in the proceeding before the court of Milan against the Italian trade mark 933481 ROCHEM MARINE (fig.);










—


in the alternative, annul the contested decision, ordering that the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO renders a new decision, refusing the declaration of invalidation filed against the European Union trade mark registration No. 12 326 609 R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services (fig.) against the classes 11 and 40;










—


order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, should the latter appear before the Court, to bear their own costs and the fees and costs of the applicant.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Articles 18 and 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.