do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-661/19: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Sasol Germany and Others v Commission (REACH — Substances of very high concern — Establishment of a list of identified substances with a view to their eventual inclusion in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Decision identifying the substance 4-tert-butylphenol as a substance meeting the criteria for inclusion in the list — Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 — Weight of evidence approach — Manifest error of assessment — Proportionality)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: biodiversity, dangerous substance, environmental protection, health risk, marketing standard, organic chemical, principle of proportionality








C_2022011EN.01002301.xml










10.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/23






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Sasol Germany and Others v Commission
(Case T-661/19) (1)

(REACH - Substances of very high concern - Establishment of a list of identified substances with a view to their eventual inclusion in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Decision identifying the substance 4-tert-butylphenol as a substance meeting the criteria for inclusion in the list - Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Weight of evidence approach - Manifest error of assessment - Proportionality)
(2022/C 11/30)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Sasol Germany GmbH (Hamburg, Germany), SI Group — Béthune (Béthune, France), BASF SE (Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany) (represented by: C. Mereu and P. Sellar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lindenthal and K. Mifsud-Bonnici, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: D. Klebs, J. Möller, S. Heimerl and S. Costanzo, acting as Agents), European Chemicals Agency (represented by: M. Heikkilä, W. Broere, S. Mahoney and A. Hautamäki, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/1194 of 5 July 2019 on the identification of 4 tert-butylphenol (PTBP) as a substance of very high concern pursuant to Article 57(f) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2019 L 187, p. 41).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sasol Germany GmbH, SI Group — Béthune and BASF SE to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the Federal Republic of Germany and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 406, 2.12.2019.
Case T-443/20: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Sanford v EUIPO — Avery Zweckform (Labels) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a label — Earlier design — Proof of disclosure — Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Evidence submitted after the expiry of the prescribed time limit — Board of Appeal’s discretion — Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, labelling, office supplies








C_2022002EN.01003201.xml










3.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 2/32






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Sanford v EUIPO — Avery Zweckform (Labels)
(Case T-443/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a label - Earlier design - Proof of disclosure - Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Evidence submitted after the expiry of the prescribed time limit - Board of Appeal’s discretion - Article 63(2) of Regulation No 6/2002 - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation No 6/2002)
(2022/C 2/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sanford LP (Atlanta, Georgia, United States) (represented by: J. Zecher, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Avery Zweckform GmbH (Oberlaindern/Valley, Germany) (represented by: H. Förster, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2020 (Case R 2413/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Avery Zweckform and Sanford.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sanford LP to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.
Case T-542/20: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Stada Arzneimittel v EUIPO — Pfizer (RUXIMBLIS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark RUXIMBLIS — Earlier EU word mark RUXIMERA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, health service, medical device, pesticide, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022002EN.01003301.xml










3.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 2/33






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Stada Arzneimittel v EUIPO — Pfizer (RUXIMBLIS)
(Case T-542/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark RUXIMBLIS - Earlier EU word mark RUXIMERA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 2/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Stada Arzneimittel AG (Bad Vilbel, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Frydendahl, A. Folliard-Monguiral and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Pfizer Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, J. Fuhrmann and P.-F. Karamolegkou, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 June 2020 (Case R 1877/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Pfizer and Stada Arzneimittel.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Stada Arzneimittel AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 339, 12.10.2020.
Case T-572/20: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Spisto v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Recruitment — Notice of Open Competition EPSO/AD/371/19 — Decision of the Selection Board to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition — Criterion to assess professional experience — Compliance of criterion applied by the Selection Board with the competition notice)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), professional experience, recruitment








C_2022002EN.01003302.xml










3.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 2/33






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Spisto v Commission
(Case T-572/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Notice of Open Competition EPSO/AD/371/19 - Decision of the Selection Board to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition - Criterion to assess professional experience - Compliance of criterion applied by the Selection Board with the competition notice)
(2022/C 2/45)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Amanda Spisto (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: N. de Montigny, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: I. Melo Sampaio and T. Lilamand, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of, first, the decision of the Selection Board of 24 September 2019 rejecting the request for a review of the refusal to admit the applicant to the next phase of Open Competition EPSO/AD/371/19, and, second, the decision of the appointing authority of 26 May 2020 rejecting the complaint of the applicant against that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Selection Board of 24 September 2019 rejecting the request for a review of the exclusion of Ms. Amanda Spisto from Competition EPSO/AD/371/19;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 371, 3.11.2020.
Case T-193/20: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Eternit v EUIPO — Eternit Österreich (Building panel) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered community design representing a building panel — Earlier design representing a panel for a noise-reduction wall — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Sector concerned — Informed user — Degree of freedom of the designer — No different overall impression — Relevance of goods actually marketed — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: building materials, designs and models








C_2022024EN.01002702.xml










17.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/27






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Eternit v EUIPO — Eternit Österreich (Building panel)
(Case T-193/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered community design representing a building panel - Earlier design representing a panel for a noise-reduction wall - Ground for invalidity - No individual character - Sector concerned - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - No different overall impression - Relevance of goods actually marketed - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
(2022/C 24/34)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Eternit (Kapelle-op-den-Bos, Belgium) (represented by: J. Muyldermans and P. Maeyaert, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Eternit Österreich GmbH (Vöcklabruck, Austria) (represented by: M. Prohaska-Marchried, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 February 2020 (Case R 1661/2018-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Eternit Österreich and Eternit.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Eternit to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Eternit Österreich GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.
Case T-771/20: Order of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — KS and KD v Council and Others (Action for damages — Common foreign and security policy — Eulex Kosovo mission — Manifest lack of jurisdiction)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU police mission, Kosovo, cruel and degrading treatment, homicide, human rights, illegal restraint, indemnification, right to culture, rule of law, torture








C_2022024EN.01003701.xml










17.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/37






Order of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — KS and KD v Council and Others
(Case T-771/20) (1)

(Action for damages - Common foreign and security policy - Eulex Kosovo mission - Manifest lack of jurisdiction)
(2022/C 24/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: KS, KD (represented by: F. Randolph QC and J. Stojsavljevic-Savic, Solicitor)

Defendants: Council of the European Union (represented by: A. Vitro, P. Mahnič and K. Kouri, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by: Y. Marinova and J. Roberti di Sarsina, acting as Agents), European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt, S. Rodríguez Sánchez-Tabernero and E. Orgován, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicants as a result of various acts and omissions by the Council, the Commission and the EEAS in the implementation of Council Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP of 4 February 2008 on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo, EULEX KOSOVO (OJ 2008 L 42, p. 92), and, in particular, during the investigations that were carried out, during that mission, into the disappearance and killing of the applicants’ family members in 1999 in Pristina (Kosovo).

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed since the Court manifestly lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine it.










2.


KS and KD shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union and the European Commission.










3.


The European External Action Service (EEAS) shall bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 62, 22.2.2021.
Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia 2021/C 455/03
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Tunisia, economic sanctions, international sanctions, natural person








C_2021455EN.01000301.xml










10.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 455/3







Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia
(2021/C 455/03)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/72/CFSP (1), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 101/2011 (2), concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Tunisia.
The Council has received information from the Tunisian authorities that will be considered within the framework of the annual review of the restrictive measures concerning all persons listed in the Annex to Decision 2011/72/CFSP and in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 101/2011. The persons concerned are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the information that relates to them, before 17 November 2021, to the following address:





Council of the European Union




General Secretariat




RELEX.1.C




Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175




1048 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË




Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu
Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council’s periodic review, in accordance with Article 5 of Decision 2011/72/CFSP and Article 12(4) of Regulation (EU) No 101/2011.


(1)  OJ L 28, 2.2.2011, p. 62.

(2)  OJ L 31, 5.2.2011, p. 1.
Case T-678/20: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Solar Electric and Others v Commission (State aid — Market for electricity produced from renewable energy sources, including photovoltaic energy — Obligation under French law to purchase electricity at a price higher than the market price — Rejection of a complaint — Article 12(1) and Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 — Scope)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, State aid, control of State aid, energy production, price of energy, renewable energy, solar energy








C_2022011EN.01002601.xml










10.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/26






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — Solar Electric and Others v Commission
(Case T-678/20) (1)

(State aid - Market for electricity produced from renewable energy sources, including photovoltaic energy - Obligation under French law to purchase electricity at a price higher than the market price - Rejection of a complaint - Article 12(1) and Article 24(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 - Scope)
(2022/C 11/34)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Solar Electric Holding (Lamentin, France), Solar Electric Guyane (Lamentin), Solar Electric Martinique (Lamentin), Société de production d’énergies renouvelables (Lamentin) (represented by: S. Manna, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and A. Bouchagiar, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 3 September 2020 rejecting the applicants’ complaint of 20 June 2020 concerning unlawful State aid to the applicants’ photovoltaic plants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Solar Electric Holding, Solar Electric Guyane, Solar Electric Martinique and Société de production d’énergies renouvelables to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.
Case T-720/21: Action brought on 10 November 2021 — G.J. Riedel v EUIPO — Brew Dog (Punk)
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, ceramics, decorative item, glass, household article, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022011EN.01003501.xml










10.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 11/35






Action brought on 10 November 2021 — G.J. Riedel v EUIPO — Brew Dog (Punk)
(Case T-720/21)
(2022/C 11/48)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: G.J. Riedel GmbH (Kufstein, Germany) (represented by: D. Terheggen, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Brew Dog plc (Ellon, United Kingdom)

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 Punk — International registration designating the European Union No 1 365 577

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 July 2021 in Case R 291/2020-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


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 T-517/20: Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — VF International v EUIPO — National Geographic Society (NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC — Earlier non-registered mark geographic — Relative ground for refusal — Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance — Article 8(4) and Article 53(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) and Article 60(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, business administration, catering industry, clothing, footwear industry, hotel industry, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_2022024EN.01003002.xml










17.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/30






Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021 — VF International v EUIPO — National Geographic Society (NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC)
(Case T-517/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC - Earlier non-registered mark geographic - Relative ground for refusal - Use in the course of trade of a sign of more than mere local significance - Article 8(4) and Article 53(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(4) and Article 60(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 24/39)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: VF International Sagl (Stabio, Switzerland) (represented by: T. van Innis and A. Van der Planken, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Fischer and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: National Geographic Society (Washington, District of Columbia, United States) (represented by: S. Malynicz QC and C. de Haas, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 May 2020 (Case R 1665/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between VF International and National Geographic Society.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders VF International Sagl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 339, 12.10.2020.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 9 November 2021 2021/C 455/04
Date: 2021-11-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2021455EN.01000401.xml










10.11.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 455/4







Euro exchange rates (1)

9 November 2021
(2021/C 455/04)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1577 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,90 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4377 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85380 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,8995 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0592 




ISK


Iceland króna


150,40 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,8555 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,197 




HUF


Hungarian forint


360,99 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5926 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9476 




TRY


Turkish lira


11,2605 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5642 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4397 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,0186 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6192 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5601 




KRW


South Korean won


1 362,47 




ZAR


South African rand


17,3964 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,3989 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5190 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 500,26 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8039 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,980 




RUB


Russian rouble


82,1148 




THB


Thai baht


37,932 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,3847 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,5335 




INR


Indian rupee


85,7910 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.