do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-329/21: Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Puma v EUIPO — V. Fraas (FRAAS) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark FRAAS — Genuine use of a mark — Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark was registered — Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Proof of genuine use)
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022303EN.01004102.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/41






Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Puma v EUIPO — V. Fraas (FRAAS)
(Case T-329/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark FRAAS - Genuine use of a mark - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark was registered - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Proof of genuine use)
(2022/C 303/51)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze and F. Tyra, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 March 2021 (Case R 2714/2019-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Puma SE to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by V. Fraas GmbH in the context of the present proceedings.






(1)  OJ C 297, 26.7.2021.
Case C-421/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 22 June 2022 — SIA DOBELES AUTOBUSU PARKS, AS CATA, SIA VTU VALMIERA, SIA JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS, SIA Jēkabpils autobusu parks v Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs, Valsts SIA Autotransporta direkcija
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: aid to undertakings, carrier, financial aid, loss, public transport, rail transport, road transport, services contract, services of general interest








C_2022326EN.01001201.xml










29.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/12






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 22 June 2022 — SIA DOBELES AUTOBUSU PARKS, AS CATA, SIA VTU VALMIERA, SIA JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS, SIA Jēkabpils autobusu parks v Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs, Valsts SIA Autotransporta direkcija
(Case C-421/22)
(2022/C 326/17)
Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa (Senāts)

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants in cassation: SIA DOBELES AUTOBUSU PARKS, AS CATA, SIA VTU VALMIERA, SIA JELGAVAS AUTOBUSU PARKS, SIA Jēkabpils autobusu parks

Other parties to the proceedings: Iepirkumu uzraudzības birojs, Valsts SIA Autotransporta direkcija

Question referred

Do the second subparagraph of Article 1(1), Article 2a(2) and Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70, (1) as amended by Regulation (EU) No 2016/2338 (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016, permit a compensation scheme which does not impose on the competent authority an obligation to compensate a public transport service provider in full, by periodically index-linking the fare chargeable under the contract (the compensation sum), for any increase in the costs connected with providing the service which fall outside the service provider’s control, and which, therefore, does not entirely eliminate the risk that the service provider will incur non-compensable losses?


(1)  OJ 2007 L 315, p. 1.

(2)  Regulation (EU) 2016/2338 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 amending Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 concerning the opening of the market for domestic passenger transport services by rail (OJ 2016 L 354, p. 22).
Case T-356/21: Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Future Motion v EUIPO — El Corte Inglés (HYPERCORE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark HYPERCORE — Earlier EU figurative mark HIPERCOR — 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: 2022-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electric machinery, electric vehicle, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022303EN.01004201.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/42






Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Future Motion v EUIPO — El Corte Inglés (HYPERCORE)
(Case T-356/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark HYPERCORE - Earlier EU figurative mark HIPERCOR - 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 303/52)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Future Motion, Inc. (Santa Cruz, California, United States) (represented by: F.-M. Orou, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 April 2021 (Case R 1229/2020 1), relating to opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés and Future Motion.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 April 2021 (Case R 1229/2020-1);










2.


Orders EUIPO, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by Future Motion, Inc.;










3.


Orders El Corte Inglés, SA, to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.
Case T-602/21: Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Kubara v EUIPO (good calories) (EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark good calories — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Legal certainty — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal product, confectionery, foodstuff, nut, prepared foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable, vegetable product








C_2022303EN.01004301.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/43






Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Kubara v EUIPO (good calories)
(Case T-602/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark good calories - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Legal certainty - Legitimate expectations)
(2022/C 303/54)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Kubara sp. z o.o. (Częstochowa, Poland) (represented by: A. Suskiewicz, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 July 2021 (Case R 2167/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Kubara sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 462, 15.11.2021.
Case T-368/22: Action brought on 22 June 2022 — Cassa Centrale v EUIPO — Bankia (BANQUÌ)
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, banking, business management, database, financial services, insurance, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2022303EN.01005601.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/56






Action brought on 22 June 2022 — Cassa Centrale v EUIPO — Bankia (BANQUÌ)
(Case T-368/22)
(2022/C 303/72)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Cassa Centrale Banca — Credito Cooperativo Italiano SpA (Trento, Italy) (represented by: J. Graffer, G. Locurto and A. Ottolini, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Bankia, SA (Madrid, Spain)

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 BANQUÌ — Application for registration No 17 889 900

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 April 2022 in Case R 1318/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision declaring the signs dissimilar and admitting the opposed application to registration;










—


order the adverse parties to bear the costs of the present proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-422/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 22 June 2022 — Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Toruniu v TE
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: form, public institution, social security legislation, social-security harmonisation








C_2022380EN.01000202.xml










3.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 380/2






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 22 June 2022 — Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Toruniu v TE
(Case C-422/22)
(2022/C 380/03)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Najwyższy

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant on a point of law: Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych Oddział w Toruniu

Respondent: TE

Questions referred







1.


Is the institution of a Member State which has issued an A1 form and which, of its own motion (without a request from the competent institution of the Member State concerned), intends to cancel/withdraw or invalidate the issued form, obliged to make arrangements with the competent institution of another Member State in accordance with rules analogous to those set out in Articles 6 and 16 of Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems …? (1)











2.


Are the arrangements to be made even before the cancellation/withdrawal or invalidation of the issued form, or is the cancellation/withdrawal or invalidation provisional in nature (Article 16(2)) and will become final in the event that the Member State institution concerned does not raise any objection or present a different view on the matter?






(1)  OJ 2009 L 284, p. 1.
Case T-657/20: Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Ryanair v Commission (Finnair II; Covid-19) (State aid — Finnish air-transport market — Aid granted by Finland to Finnair in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic — Recapitalisation of an airline by its public and private shareholders on a pro rata basis in proportion to the previously existing ownership structure — Decision not to raise any objections — Temporary Framework for State aid measures — Measure intended to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State — Derogation from certain requirements of the temporary framework — No weighing of the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition — Equal treatment — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Finland, State aid, aid for restructuring, airline, control of State aid, coronavirus disease, epidemic, equal treatment, freedom to provide services, right of establishment








C_2022303EN.01003901.xml










8.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 303/39






Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Ryanair v Commission (Finnair II; Covid-19)
(Case T-657/20) (1)

(State aid - Finnish air-transport market - Aid granted by Finland to Finnair in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic - Recapitalisation of an airline by its public and private shareholders on a pro rata basis in proportion to the previously existing ownership structure - Decision not to raise any objections - Temporary Framework for State aid measures - Measure intended to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State - Derogation from certain requirements of the temporary framework - No weighing of the beneficial effects of the aid against its adverse effects on trading conditions and the maintenance of undistorted competition - Equal treatment - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Obligation to state reasons)
(2022/C 303/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ryanair DAC (Swords, Ireland) (represented by: F.-C. Laprévote, V. Blanc, E. Vahida, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, S. Noë and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: T. Stéhelin and P. Dodeller, acting as Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: H. Leppo and A. Laine, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of European Commission Decision C(2020) 3970 final of 9 June 2020 on State aid SA.57410 (2020/N) — Finland COVID-19: Recapitalisation of Finnair.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ryanair DAC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders the French Republic and the Republic of Finland to bear their own respective costs.






(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.
Communication of the European Parliament concerning the European Citizen’s Prize CIVI EUROPAEO PRAEMIUM 2022/C 283/01
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European citizenship, candidate, cultural prize








C_2022283EN.01000101.xml










25.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 283/1






Communication of the European Parliament concerning the European Citizen’s Prize

CIVI EUROPAEO PRAEMIUM

(2022/C 283/01)
The Chancellery of the European Citizen’s Prize held its annual meeting on 22 June 2022 with Mrs Dita Charanzová, Vice-President of the European Parliament and Chancellor of the European Citizen’s Prize in the chair.
At that meeting the following list of prize winners for 2022 was drawn up.
The prizes will be awarded at public award ceremonies in the Member States where laureates are based. The ceremonies are organized by the Liaison Offices of the European Parliament. The laureates will also attend a central award ceremony at the European Parliament in Brussels in November 2022.


CIVI EUROPAEO PRAEMIUM




Laureates/Winners



Austria: Civil courage – Initiative against the deportation of schoolgirls

Belgium: My talents for diversity

Belgium: The Coordination Centre of Promote Ukraine

Croatia: FUND 5.5

Cyprus: OXYGONO (Cyprus Forum & Nomoplatform)

Czech Republic: Charita Znojmo’s humanitarian assistance to Ukraine

Czech Republic: #HolkyzMarketingu

Denmark: Europe Dialogue

Estonia: Assisting Ukraine and ‘Ukraina heaks!’ (For Ukraine) initiative

France: InteRadional

Germany: ApplicAid

Greece: Doctors of the World - Greece: Emergency response to humanitarian crisis

Hungary: Miklós Both, folk song collector

Ireland: Jigsaw Pandemic Response

Ireland: Connect Migrant Youth

Italy: #siamotuttelaura

Italy: Young people remember the Shoah – SOS UKRAINE

Latvia: Hospiss LV

Lithuania: Blue/Yellow

Luxembourg: Slava Ukrayini Luxembourg

Malta: The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation

Netherlands: Nieuwscheckers

Poland: José Andrés, the chef that feeds the refugees of the war in Ukraine

Poland: Volunteers Without Borders’ – refugees from Ukraine

Portugal: ‘Tampinhas’ bottle cap project

Romania: Support for refugee children from Ukraine

Slovenia: Legal Network for the Protection of Democracy

Slovakia: Europe in a cube (Kniha Európa V Kocke)

Spain: Customer Service in Bank Branches·‘#Soy mayor, no idiota’ (I am elderly, not an idiot)

Spain: ANAR 116000 Helpline for missing children
Case T-502/20: Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Munich v EUIPO — Tone Watch (MUNICH10A.T.M.) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — European Union word mark MUNICH10A.T.M. — Earlier EU and national figurative marks MUNICH — Relative grounds for refusal — Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity of the goods and services — No aesthetic complementarity — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001) — No damage to reputation — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Rights of the defence)
Date: 2022-06-22
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, clock and watch industry, electronic commerce, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, optical industry, precious metal, precious stones, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022311EN.01001001.xml










16.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/10






Judgment of the General Court of 22 June 2022 — Munich v EUIPO — Tone Watch (MUNICH10A.T.M.)
(Case T-502/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union word mark MUNICH10A.T.M. - Earlier EU and national figurative marks MUNICH - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity of the goods and services - No aesthetic complementarity - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001) - No damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Rights of the defence)
(2022/C 311/13)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Munich, SL (La Torre de Claramunt, Spain) (represented by: M. del Mar Guix Vilanova, 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: Tone Watch, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. López Martínez, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 March 2020 (case R 2472/2018-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between the applicant and the intervener.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Munich, SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 5.10.2020.