do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-757/18: Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou v Commission (State aid — Greek casinos — System providing for a levy of 80 % on admission fees of different amounts — Differentiation between public and private casinos — Complaint — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering its recovery — Annulment of the decision by a decision of the General Court — Decision finding no State aid — Action for annulment — Challengeable act — Admissibility — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, State aid, control of State aid, gaming establishment, reimbursement of aid, rights of the defence








C_2022119EN.01003102.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/31






Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou v Commission
(Case T-757/18) (1)

(State aid - Greek casinos - System providing for a levy of 80 % on admission fees of different amounts - Differentiation between public and private casinos - Complaint - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and unlawful and ordering its recovery - Annulment of the decision by a decision of the General Court - Decision finding no State aid - Action for annulment - Challengeable act - Admissibility - Rights of the defence)
(2022/C 119/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE (Loutraki, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas and A. Pappas, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar and P.-J. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Regency Entertainment Psychagogiki kai Touristiki AE (Maroussi, Greece), Elliniko Kazino Parnithas AE (Maroussi) (represented by: N. Niejahr, B. Hoorelbeke, I. Drillerakis and E. Rantos, lawyers)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2018/1575 of 9 August 2018 on the measures to certain Greek casinos SA.28973 — C 16/2010 (ex NN 22/2010, ex CP 318/2009) implemented by Greece (OJ 2018 L 262, p. 61).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Koinopraxia Touristiki Loutrakiou AE OTA — Loutraki AE — Klab Otel Loutraki Kazino Touristikes kai Xenodocheiakes Epicheiriseis AE to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.
Case T-76/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Masterbuilders, Heiermann, Schmidtmann v EUIPO — Cirillo (POMODORO) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark POMODORO — Genuine use of the trade mark — Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Statement setting out the grounds of appeal — Period for lodging — Article 58(3) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 — Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation 2018/625 — Proof of genuine use)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer, cultural event, education, provision of services, registered trade mark, scientific apparatus, software, sporting event, trade-mark law








C_2022119EN.01003702.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/37






Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Masterbuilders, Heiermann, Schmidtmann v EUIPO — Cirillo (POMODORO)
(Case T-76/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark POMODORO - Genuine use of the trade mark - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Statement setting out the grounds of appeal - Period for lodging - Article 58(3) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation 2018/625 - Proof of genuine use)
(2022/C 119/50)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Masterbuilders, Heiermann, Schmidtmann GbR (Tübingen, Germany) (represented by: H. Hillers, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Francesco Cirillo (Berlin, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 November 2020 (Case R 715/2020-5), relating to revocation proceedings between Masterbuilders, Heiermann, Schmidtmann and Mr Cirillo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Masterbuilders, Heiermann, Schmidtmann GbR to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in the proceedings before the General Court.






(1)  OJ C 110, 29.3.2021.
Case C-42/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 19 January 2022 — Global, Companhia de Seguros, S.A. v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, insurance, purchase, sale, tax exemption, tax relief, vehicle parts








C_2022171EN.01001701.xml










25.4.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 171/17






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 19 January 2022 — Global, Companhia de Seguros, S.A. v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira
(Case C-42/22)
(2022/C 171/21)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Global, Companhia de Seguros, S.A.

Respondent: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Questions referred







A.


Must Article 13(B)(a) of the Sixth VAT Directive, (1) and, therefore, the current Article 135(1)(a) of the VAT Directive, (2) be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘insurance and reinsurance transactions’ includes, for the purposes of exemption from VAT, related or supplementary activities such as the purchase and sale of parts from written-off vehicles?










B.


Must Article 13(B)(c) of the Sixth VAT Directive, and, therefore, the later Article 136(a) of the VAT Directive, be interpreted as meaning that parts from written-off vehicles are regarded as being purchased and sold solely for an exempt entity, where those goods have not given rise to the right to deduction of VAT?










C.


Is it contrary to the principle of VAT neutrality for the sale of parts from written-off vehicles by insurance companies not to be exempt from VAT where there was no right to deduction of VAT?






(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1, Portuguese special edition: Chapter 09 Volume 001 P. 54).

(2)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).
Case T-148/20: Order of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — FC v EASO (Action for annulment — Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Refusal to provide a certificate of good character — Refusal to accept a withdrawal of the resignation — Purely confirmatory act — Time limit for complaints — Irregularity in the pre-litigation procedure — Inadmissibility — Action for damages — Close link with the claim for annulment — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: damages, dismissal, indemnification, interest, remuneration of work, rights of the defence, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU), work contract








C_2022119EN.01004201.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/42






Order of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — FC v EASO
(Case T-148/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Refusal to provide a certificate of good character - Refusal to accept a withdrawal of the resignation - Purely confirmatory act - Time limit for complaints - Irregularity in the pre-litigation procedure - Inadmissibility - Action for damages - Close link with the claim for annulment - Inadmissibility)
(2022/C 119/58)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: FC (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: European Asylum Support Office (represented by: P. Eyckmans and M. Stamatopoulou, acting as Agents, and by A. Guillerme and T. Bontinck, lawyers)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of EASO’s decision of [confidential] refusing to accept the applicant’s withdrawal of her resignation and rejecting the request for a certificate of good character and the decision rejecting the applicant’s complaint against it and, second, compensation for the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


FC shall bear her own costs.






(1)  OJ C 175, 25.5.2020.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 18 January 2022 2022/C 28/01
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022028EN.01000101.xml










19.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 28/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

18 January 2022
(2022/C 28/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1367 




JPY


Japanese yen


130,39 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4425 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,83673 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,3185 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0414 




ISK


Iceland króna


146,00 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,9638 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,426 




HUF


Hungarian forint


357,00 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5260 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9449 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,4447 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5833 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4228 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,8576 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6798 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5349 




KRW


South Korean won


1 355,33 




ZAR


South African rand


17,5398 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,2212 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5225 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 318,64 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,7554 




PHP


Philippine peso


58,553 




RUB


Russian rouble


86,7325 




THB


Thai baht


37,635 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,2797 




MXN


Mexican peso


23,1443 




INR


Indian rupee


84,8130 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-270/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Estetica Group Iwona Michalak v EUIPO (PURE BEAUTY) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU figurative mark PURE BEAUTY — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022119EN.01004001.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/40






Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Estetica Group Iwona Michalak v EUIPO (PURE BEAUTY)
(Case T-270/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark PURE BEAUTY - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 119/54)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Estetica Group Iwona Michalak (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: P. Gutowski, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2021 (Case R 1456/2020-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign PURE BEAUTY as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Estetica Group Iwona Michalak to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Case T-99/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Construcciones Electromecánicas Sabero v EUIPO — Magdalenas de las Heras (Heras Bareche) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Heras Bareche — Earlier EU figurative mark MAGDALENAS DeLasHeras — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business management, catering industry, coffee, confectionery, franchising, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2022119EN.01003801.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/38






Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Construcciones Electromecánicas Sabero v EUIPO — Magdalenas de las Heras (Heras Bareche)
(Case T-99/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Heras Bareche - Earlier EU figurative mark MAGDALENAS DeLasHeras - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 119/51)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Construcciones Electromecánicas Sabero, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, P. Román Maestre and D. Liern Cendrero, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Magdalenas de las Heras, SA (Aranda de Duero, Spain)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2020 (Case R 1019/2020-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Magdalenas de las Heras and Construcciones Electromecánicas Sabero.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Construcciones Electromecánicas Sabero, SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 138, 19.4.2021.
Case T-36/22: Action brought on 19 January 2022 — Romedor Pharma v EUIPO — Perfect Care Distribution (PERFECT FARMA CERVIRON)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, herbicide, medical device, pesticide, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2022138EN.01002302.xml










28.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/23






Action brought on 19 January 2022 — Romedor Pharma v EUIPO — Perfect Care Distribution (PERFECT FARMA CERVIRON)
(Case T-36/22)
(2022/C 138/27)
Language in which the application was lodged: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Romedor Pharma SRL (Focşani, Romania) (represented by: E. Dicu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Perfect Care Distribution (Bucharest, Romania)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark PERFECT FARMA CERVIRON — EU trade mark No 10 864 511

Procedure before EUIPO: proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 November 2021 in Case R 522/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


uphold the action as formulated and reasoned;










—


annul the contested decision and, consequently, uphold the application for a declaration of invalidity in respect of EU trade mark No 10 864 511.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(c), in conjunction with Article 8(4), of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Special report No 2/2022 Energy efficiency in enterprises: Some energy savings but weaknesses in planning and project selection 2022/C 27/07
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, EU Member State, EU energy policy, European Regional Development Fund, carbon neutrality, energy consumption, energy efficiency, energy saving, principle of additionality








C_2022027EN.01001701.xml










19.1.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 27/17






Special report No 2/2022
Energy efficiency in enterprises: Some energy savings but weaknesses in planning and project selection
(2022/C 27/07)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that special report No 2/2022 ‘Energy efficiency in enterprises: Some energy savings but weaknesses in planning and project selection’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ Internet: http://eca.europa.eu.
Case T-37/22: Action brought on 19 January 2022 — Romedor Pharma v EUIPO — Perfect Care Distribution (Cerviron)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, medical device, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022138EN.01002401.xml










28.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 138/24






Action brought on 19 January 2022 — Romedor Pharma v EUIPO — Perfect Care Distribution (Cerviron)
(Case T-37/22)
(2022/C 138/28)
Language in which the application was lodged: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Romedor Pharma SRL (Focşani, Romania) (represented by: E. Dicu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Perfect Care Distribution (Bucharest, Romania)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark CERVIRON — EU trade mark No 18 100 664

Procedure before EUIPO: proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 November 2021 in Case R 520/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


uphold the action as formulated and reasoned;










—


annul the contested decision and, consequently, uphold the application for a declaration of invalidity in respect of EU trade mark No 18 100 664.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(c), in conjunction with Article 8(4), of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-483/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Tecnica Group v EUIPO — Zeitneu (Shape of a boot) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU three-dimensional mark — Shape of a boot — Declaration of partial invalidity — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Decisions of EU trade mark courts ruling on an action for a declaration of non-infringement — Res judicata)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022119EN.01003402.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/34






Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Tecnica Group v EUIPO — Zeitneu (Shape of a boot)
(Case T-483/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU three-dimensional mark - Shape of a boot - Declaration of partial invalidity - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Decisions of EU trade mark courts ruling on an action for a declaration of non-infringement - Res judicata)
(2022/C 119/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Tecnica Group SpA (Giavera del Montello, Italy) (represented by: C. Sala, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Zeitneu GmbH (Zürich, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Dumoulin, F. Hagemann, M. Giorcelli and M. Venturello, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 May 2020 (Case R 1093/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Zeitneu and Tecnica Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Tecnica Group SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Zeitneu GmbH.






(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.
Case T-33/22: Action brought on 19 January 2022 — Vallegre v EUIPO — Joseph Phelps Vineyards (PORTO INSÍGNIA)
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fortified wine, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022119EN.01005201.xml










14.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 119/52






Action brought on 19 January 2022 — Vallegre v EUIPO — Joseph Phelps Vineyards (PORTO INSÍGNIA)
(Case T-33/22)
(2022/C 119/74)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Vallegre, Vinhos do Porto, SA (Sabrosa, Portugal) (represented by: E. Armero Lavie and G. Marín Raigal, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Joseph Phelps Vineyards LLC (St. Helena, California, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark PORTO INSÍGNIA — Application for registration No 16 393 688

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 October 2021 in Case R 894/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener 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 in the erroneous assessment of the conflicting marks.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2020/1429 as regards the duration of the reference period for the application of temporary measures concerning the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure’ (COM(2021) 832 final — 2021/0437(COD))
Date: 2022-01-19
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU Member State, EU aid, charges for use of infrastructure, common transport policy, coronavirus disease, epidemic, provision of services, rail transport, transport infrastructure, transport market








C_2022194EN.01010701.xml










12.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 194/107






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2020/1429 as regards the duration of the reference period for the application of temporary measures concerning the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure’
(COM(2021) 832 final — 2021/0437(COD))
(2022/C 194/16)






Referral


European Parliament, 17.1.2022
Council of the European Union, 21.1.2022




Legal basis


Article 91 and 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society




Adopted at plenary


19.1.2022




Plenary session No


566




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


229/1/1




Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 566th plenary session of 19 and 20 January 2022 (meeting of 19 January), by 229 votes to 1 with 1 abstention, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 19 January 2022.


The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Christa SCHWENG