do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-295/22 P: Appeal brought on 4 May 2022 by Luis Miguel Novais against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 4 March 2022 in Case T-66/22, Novais v Portugal
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: higher court, infringement of EU law, judge, jurisdiction








C_2023024EN.01001901.xml










23.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 24/19






Appeal brought on 4 May 2022 by Luis Miguel Novais against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 4 March 2022 in Case T-66/22, Novais v Portugal
(Case C-295/22 P)
(2023/C 24/25)
Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties


Appellant: Luis Miguel Novais (represented by: Á. Oliveira and C. Almeida Lopes, advogados)

Other party to the proceedings: Portuguese Republic
By order of 24 November 2022, the Court (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal as manifestly unfounded.
Case T-384/20: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — OC v Commission (Non-contractual liability — OLAF investigation — Press release — Processing of personal data — Presumption of innocence — Confidentiality of OLAF investigations — Right to sound administration — Proportionality — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, confidentiality, data protection, dissemination of information, fundamental rights, indemnification, personal data, press release, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence








C_2022257EN.01003002.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/30






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — OC v Commission
(Case T-384/20) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - OLAF investigation - Press release - Processing of personal data - Presumption of innocence - Confidentiality of OLAF investigations - Right to sound administration - Proportionality - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)
(2022/C 257/39)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: OC (represented by: P. Yatagantzidis and V. Cheirdaris, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and T. Adamopoulos, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action under Article 268 TFEU seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the publication of OLAF press release No 13/2020 of 5 May 2020, in that it unlawfully processed her personal data and conveyed false information about her.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders OC to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 3 May 2022 2022/C 182/02
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022182EN.01001301.xml










4.5.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 182/13






Euro exchange rates (1)

3 May 2022
(2022/C 182/02)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0556 




JPY


Japanese yen


137,06 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4403 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84130 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,3978 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0272 




ISK


Iceland króna


137,60 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,9090 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,662 




HUF


Hungarian forint


382,15 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6925 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9475 




TRY


Turkish lira


15,6941 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4825 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3570 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2838 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6366 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4605 




KRW


South Korean won


1 335,64 




ZAR


South African rand


16,8303 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,9759 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5555 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 288,47 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5956 




PHP


Philippine peso


55,455 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,387 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,3143 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,5025 




INR


Indian rupee


80,8420 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-4/21: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Advanced Superabrasives v EUIPO — Adi (ASI ADVANCED SUPERABRASIVES) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark ASI ADVANCED SUPERABRASIVES — Earlier EU figurative and word marks ADI — 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) — Remittal of the case to the Opposition Division — Article 71(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 27(3)(b) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, hand tool, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022257EN.01003101.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/31






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Advanced Superabrasives v EUIPO — Adi (ASI ADVANCED SUPERABRASIVES)
(Case T-4/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark ASI ADVANCED SUPERABRASIVES - Earlier EU figurative and word marks ADI - 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) - Remittal of the case to the Opposition Division - Article 71(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(3)(b) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
(2022/C 257/40)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Advanced Superabrasives, Inc. (Mars Hill, North Carolina, United States) (represented by: D. Piróg and A. Rytel, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Adi Srl (Thiene, Italy) (represented by B. Saguatti, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2020 (Case R 2713/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Adi and Advanced Superabrasives.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Advanced Superabrasives, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 62, 22.2.2021.
Case T-298/21: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Bodegas Beronia v EUIPO — Bodegas Carlos Serres (ALEGRA DE BERONIA) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark ALEGRA DE BERONIA — Earlier national word mark ALEGRO — Relative ground for refusal — Lack of likelihood of confusion — Article 8(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_2022257EN.01003301.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/33






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Bodegas Beronia v EUIPO — Bodegas Carlos Serres (ALEGRA DE BERONIA)
(Case T-298/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark ALEGRA DE BERONIA - Earlier national word mark ALEGRO - Relative ground for refusal - Lack of likelihood of confusion - Article 8(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 257/43)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Bodegas Beronia (Ollauri, Spain) (represented by: J. Mora Cortés, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Bodegas Carlos Serres, SL (Haro, Spain) (represented by: F. Pérez Álvarez and J. Pérez Itarte, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 March 2021 (Case R 2013/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Bodegas Carlos Serres and Bodegas Beronia.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 March 2021 (Case R 2013/2020-1);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs as well as pay half of the costs of Bodegas Beronia, SA, including half the costs necessarily incurred by them for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










3.


Orders Bodegas Carlos Serres, SL, to bear its own costs as well as pay half the costs of Bodegas Beronia, including half the costs necessarily incurred by them for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.






(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Case T-619/21: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — PricewaterhouseCoopers Belastingadviseurs NV v EUIPO — Haufe-Lexware (TAXMARC) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark TAXMARC — Prior EU figurative mark TAXMAN — Suspension of proceedings — Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, business administration, business management, computer equipment, computer system, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2022266EN.01002402.xml










11.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 266/24






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — PricewaterhouseCoopers Belastingadviseurs NV v EUIPO — Haufe-Lexware (TAXMARC)
(Case T-619/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark TAXMARC - Prior EU figurative mark TAXMAN - Suspension of proceedings - Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
(2022/C 266/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: PricewaterhouseCoopers Belastingadviseurs NV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: R. Stoop, lawyer)

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, intervener before the General Court: Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. KG (Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany) (represented by: N. Hebeis, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 July 2021 (Case R 131/2021-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Haufe-Lexware GmbH Co. KG and the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 21 July 2021 (Case R 131/2021-4);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by PricewaterhouseCoopers Belastingadviseurs NV for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court;










3.


Orders Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs relating to the proceedings before the Court.






(1)  OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.
Case T-237/21: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Fidelity National Information Services v EUIPO — IFIS (FIS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark FIS — Earlier EU word mark IFIS — 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: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, banking, consultancy, financial services, financial transaction, marketing, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2022257EN.01003202.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/32






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Fidelity National Information Services v EUIPO — IFIS (FIS)
(Case T-237/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark FIS - Earlier EU word mark IFIS - 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))
(2022/C 257/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (Jacksonville, Florida, United States) (represented by: P. Wilhelm, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Banca IFIS SpA (Mestre, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 February 2021 (Case R 1460/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Banca IFIS and Fidelity National Information Services.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Fidelity National Information Services, Inc., to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 252, 28.6.2021.
Case T-423/14 RENV: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Larko v Commission (State aid — Aid implemented by Greece — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market — Concept of State aid — Advantage — Private investor test — Guarantee premium — Undertaking in difficulty — Awareness of the Greek authorities — Commission Notice on State aid in the form of guarantees — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Greece, State aid, capital increase, company in difficulties, control of State aid, credit guarantee, mining extraction, reimbursement of aid








C_2022257EN.01003001.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/30






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Larko v Commission
(Case T-423/14 RENV) (1)

(State aid - Aid implemented by Greece - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market - Concept of State aid - Advantage - Private investor test - Guarantee premium - Undertaking in difficulty - Awareness of the Greek authorities - Commission Notice on State aid in the form of guarantees - Manifest error of assessment)
(2022/C 257/38)
Language of the case: Greek

Parties


Applicant: Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: I. Drillerakis, E. Rantos and N. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU seeking partial annulment of Commission Decision 2014/539/EU of 27 March 2014 on State aid SA.34572 (20113/C) (ex 13/NN) implemented by Greece for Larco General Mining & Metallurgical Company S.A. (OJ 2014 L 254, p. 24).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Larko Geniki Metalleftiki kai Metallourgiki AE to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission in Cases T-423/14 and T-423/14 RENV, and in Case C-244/18 P.






(1)  OJ C 292, 1.9.2014.
Case T-117/21: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Deichmann v EUIPO — Munich (Representation of two crossed stripes placed on the side of a shoe) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark representing a cross on the side of a sports shoe — Article 7(1)(b) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2022257EN.01003201.xml










4.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 257/32






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Deichmann v EUIPO — Munich (Representation of two crossed stripes placed on the side of a shoe)
(Case T-117/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark representing a cross on the side of a sports shoe - Article 7(1)(b) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2022/C 257/41)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Deichmann SE (Essen, Germany) (represented by: C. Onken, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Munich, SL (La Torre de Claramunt, Spain) (represented by: J. Güell Serra and M. Guix Vilanova, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 December 2020 (Case R 2882/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Deichmann and Munich.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Deichmann SE to pay the costs of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and of Munich, SL.






(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.
Case T-261/21: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Sturz v EUIPO — Clatronic International (STEAKER) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark STEAKER — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — No distinctive character — Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, air conditioning, catering industry, gas appliance, household electrical appliance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022266EN.01002301.xml










11.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 266/23






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Sturz v EUIPO — Clatronic International (STEAKER)
(Case T-261/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark STEAKER - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No distinctive character - Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2022/C 266/26)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Manfred Sturz (Schorndorf, Germany) (represented by: B. Bittner, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Clatronic International GmbH (Kempen, Germany) (represented by: V. Herbort, lawyer)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 March 2021 (Case R 214/2020-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign STEAKER as an EU trade mark, by which the Board of Appeal found that the mark applied for was descriptive of the goods in question.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Manfred Sturz to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 289, 19.7.2021.
Case T-718/20: Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Wizz Air Hungary v Commission (TAROM; Rescue Aid) (State aid — Air transport — Support measure taken by Romania — Rescue aid to TAROM — Decision not to raise any objections — Action for annulment — Status as a party concerned — Safeguarding of procedural rights — Admissibility — Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty — Measure aiming to prevent social hardship or to address market failure — ‘One time, last time’ principle — Effect of earlier aid granted before Romania’s accession to the European Union — Serious difficulties — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2022-05-04
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Romania, State aid, accession to the European Union, aid for restructuring, aid to undertakings, air transport, company in difficulties, control of State aid








C_2022266EN.01002201.xml










11.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 266/22






Judgment of the General Court of 4 May 2022 — Wizz Air Hungary v Commission (TAROM; Rescue Aid)
(Case T-718/20) (1)

(State aid - Air transport - Support measure taken by Romania - Rescue aid to TAROM - Decision not to raise any objections - Action for annulment - Status as a party concerned - Safeguarding of procedural rights - Admissibility - Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty - Measure aiming to prevent social hardship or to address market failure - ‘One time, last time’ principle - Effect of earlier aid granted before Romania’s accession to the European Union - Serious difficulties - Obligation to state reasons)
(2022/C 266/24)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: E. Vahida, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, V. Bottka and I. Barcew, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Decision C(2020) 1160 final of the Commission of 24 February 2020 concerning State Aid SA.56244 (2020/N) — Romania — Rescue aid to TAROM (OJ 2020 C 310, p. 3), by which the European Commission, first, did not raise any objections to an aid measure granted by Romania to the Compania Nationala de Transporturi Aeriene Romane ‘TAROM SA’ (‘TAROM’) consisting of a loan in the amount of 175 952 000 Romanian lei (RON) (approximately EUR 36 660 000), repayable at the end of a period of six months, and, second, declared that aid to be compatible with the internal market.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.






(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.