do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-30/21: Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — L’Oréal v EUIPO — Debonair Trading Internacional (SO COUTURE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark SO COUTURE — EU word mark SO …? — Relative grounds 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: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022207EN.01003701.xml










23.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/37






Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — L’Oréal v EUIPO — Debonair Trading Internacional (SO COUTURE)
(Case T-30/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SO COUTURE - EU word mark SO …? - Relative grounds 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))
(2022/C 207/48)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: L’Oréal (Clichy, France) (represented by: M. Treis and E. M. Strobel, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Debonair Trading Internacional Lda (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: J. Quirin and J. P. Jacquey, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 November 2020 (Case R 158/2016 5), relating to opposition proceedings between Debonair Trading Internacional and L’Oréal.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders L’Oréal to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Special report No 5/2022 Cybersecurity of EU institutions bodies and agencies – level of preparedness overall not commensurate with the threats 2022/C 142/04
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU body, EU institution, EU office or agency, computer crime, information security, information system, information warfare, operation of the Institutions, risk management








C_2022142EN.01001201.xml










30.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/12






Special report No 5/2022
Cybersecurity of EU institutions bodies and agencies – level of preparedness overall not commensurate with the threats
(2022/C 142/04)
The European Court of Auditors has published its special report No 5/2022: ‘Cybersecurity of EU institutions bodies and agencies – level of preparedness overall not commensurate with the threats’.
The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ Internet: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=60922
Case T-278/21: Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background II) (EU trade mark — Application for EU pattern mark — Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background II — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, furniture industry, leather, miscellaneous industries, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law, vehicle








C_2022213EN.01003702.xml










30.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/37






Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background II)
(Case T-278/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU pattern mark - Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background II - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 213/50)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Siebertz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Schäfer and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1896/2020-5), concerning an application for registration of a pattern sign representing three-pointed stars on a black background II as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Daimler AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Case T-342/17: Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Deutsche Lufthansa and Others v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for airfreight — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport — Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) — Exchange of information — Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission — Obligation to state reasons — Effect on trade between Member States — State coercion — Single and continuous infringement)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, exchange of information, jurisdiction, price agreement, sanction (EU)








C_2022207EN.01003001.xml










23.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/30






Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Deutsche Lufthansa and Others v Commission
(Case T-342/17) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for airfreight - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport - Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) - Exchange of information - Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission - Obligation to state reasons - Effect on trade between Member States - State coercion - Single and continuous infringement)
(2022/C 207/39)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Deutsche Lufthansa AG (Cologne, Germany), Lufthansa Cargo AG (Frankfurt am Main, Germany), Swiss International Air Lines AG (Basle, Switzerland) (represented by: S. Völcker, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes and H. Leupold, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Article 1 of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) in so far as it relates to the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear one third of its own costs;










3.


Orders Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Lufthansa Cargo AG, Swiss International Air Lines AG to bear their own costs and to pay two thirds of those incurred by the Commission.






(1)  OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Case T-125/22 R: Order of the President of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — RT France v Council (Interim relief — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine — Suspension of the broadcasting activities of certain media — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — No urgency — Weighing of competing interests)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, mass media








C_2022213EN.01004101.xml










30.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/41






Order of the President of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — RT France v Council
(Case T-125/22 R)
(Interim relief - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine - Suspension of the broadcasting activities of certain media - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency - Weighing of competing interests)
(2022/C 213/57)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: RT France (Boulogne-Billancourt, France) (represented by: E. Piwnica, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Lejeune, R. Meyer and S. Emmerechts, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for suspension of the operation of Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/351 of 1 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 65, p. 5) and of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/350 of 1 March 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia's actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 65, p. 1), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the order







1.


The application for interim relief is dismissed.










2.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the European Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium, the French Republic and the Republic of Poland.










3.


The costs are reserved save for those incurred by the European Commission, the Kingdom of Belgium, the French Republic and the Republic of Poland. Those parties shall bear the costs in the context of their application for leave to intervene.
Case T-279/21: Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background IV) (EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark — Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background IV — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, cosmetic product, furniture industry, leather, miscellaneous industries, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law, vehicle








C_2022213EN.01003801.xml










30.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 213/38






Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Daimler v EUIPO (Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background IV)
(Case T-279/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark - Representation of three-pointed stars on a black background IV - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 213/51)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Daimler AG (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: N. Siebertz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Schäfer and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1898/2020-5) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing three-pointed stars on a black background IV as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Daimler AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Case T-265/21: Order of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Sunshine Smile v EUIPO (PlusDental+) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, cosmetics industry, dental medicine, medical device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022237EN.01005202.xml










20.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 237/52






Order of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Sunshine Smile v EUIPO (PlusDental+)
(Case T-265/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 237/67)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Sunshine Smile GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: D. Weller and V. Wolf, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 March 2021 (Case R 1834/2020-2), relating to an application for registration of the figurative sign PlusDental+ as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 263, 5.7.2021.
Case T-327/21: Order of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Scania CV v EUIPO (V8) (EU trade mark — Revocation of the contested decision — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, bus, commercial vehicle, construction equipment, electric machinery, electronic component, engine, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vehicle parts








C_2022222EN.01002901.xml










7.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 222/29






Order of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Scania CV v EUIPO (V8)
(Case T-327/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation of the contested decision - Action which has become devoid of purpose - No need to adjudicate)
(2022/C 222/48)
Language of the case: Swedish

Parties


Applicant: Scania CV AB (Södertälje, Sweden) (represented by: C. Langenius, P. Sundin and S. Falkner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Bosse and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 April 2021 (Case R 1868/2020-1), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign V8 as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order







1.


There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.










2.


The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Scania CV AB.






(1)  OJ C 297, 26.7.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10524 – MERCEDES-BENZ / TOTALENERGIES / STELLANTIS / ACC) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 208/01
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electricity storage device, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2022208EN.01000101.xml










24.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 208/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10524 – MERCEDES-BENZ / TOTALENERGIES / STELLANTIS / ACC)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 208/01)
On 30 March 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10524. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-323/17: Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Martinair Holland v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for airfreight — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport — Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) — Exchange of information — Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission — Single and continuous infringement — Equal treatment — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, equal treatment, exchange of information, price agreement








C_2022207EN.01002201.xml










23.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 207/22






Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2022 — Martinair Holland v Commission
(Case T-323/17) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for airfreight - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) - Exchange of information - Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission - Single and continuous infringement - Equal treatment - Obligation to state reasons)
(2022/C 207/30)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Martinair Holland NV (Haarlemmermeer, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Smeets, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes and C. Vollrath, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) in so far as it relates to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders the European Commission to bear one third of its own costs;










3.


Orders Martinair Holland NV to bear its own costs and pay two thirds of those incurred by the Commission.






(1)  OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10679 - TELEFONICA / PONTEGADEA / TELXIUS) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 142/07
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, real estate business, telecommunications, textile industry








C_2022142EN.01001801.xml










30.3.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/18






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10679 - TELEFONICA / PONTEGADEA / TELXIUS)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 142/07)

1.   
On 22 March 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Telefónica, S.A. (‘Telefónica’, Spain),










—


Pontegadea Inversiones, S.L. (‘Pontegadea’, Spain),










—


Telxius Telecom, S.A. (‘Telxius’, Spain), currently jointly controlled by Telefonica and Taurus Bidco S.à.r.l..




Telefónica and Pontegadea will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Telxius.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned:






—


for Telefónica: a global telecommunications company which operates fixed and mobile telecommunications networks. Telefónica offers mobile, landline, internet and television services under a number of brands, including Movistar, O2 and Vivo;










—


for Pontegadea: active mainly in the textile sector and in real estate investments;










—


for Telxius: operates an international network of high-capacity submarine fiber optic cables, provides direct connectivity to the internet and offers a range of capacity services on its network, such as point to point connections with dedicated bandwidth.






3.   
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.10679 - TELEFONICA / PONTEGADEA / TELXIUS
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 22964301
Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.