do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10780 – WATERLAND / KIDSFOUNDATION / PARTOU) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 281/01
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Netherlands, United Kingdom, child care, economic concentration, investment company, merger control








C_2022281EN.01000101.xml










22.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 281/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10780 – WATERLAND / KIDSFOUNDATION / PARTOU)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 281/01)
On 29 June 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 32022M10780. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-306/20: Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González v EUIPO — Ireland and Ornua (La Irlandesa 1943) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark La Irlandesa 1943 — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Declaration of invalidity by the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO — Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court — Relevant date for the examination of an absolute ground for invalidity — Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public — Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Bad faith — Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fats, foodstuff, meat, milk product, processed food product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022318EN.01003401.xml










22.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/34






Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González v EUIPO — Ireland and Ornua (La Irlandesa 1943)
(Case T-306/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark La Irlandesa 1943 - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Declaration of invalidity by the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO - Evidence submitted for the first time before the Court - Relevant date for the examination of an absolute ground for invalidity - Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(2022/C 318/46)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain) (represented by: J. García Domínguez, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, D. Hanf and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Ireland

Other party to the proceedings before the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Ornua Co-operative Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and A. Sanz Cerralbo, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Grand Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 March 2020 (Case R 1499/2016-G).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Hijos de Moisés Rodríguez González, SA, to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Case T-403/22: Action brought on 29 June 2022 — DZ Bank v SRB
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, bank resolution, discretionary power, financial risk, financing plan, fund (EU), judicial review, official language, principle of proportionality, right to justice








C_2022380EN.01001402.xml










3.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 380/14






Action brought on 29 June 2022 — DZ Bank v SRB
(Case T-403/22)
(2022/C 380/17)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: DZ Bank AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank, Frankfurt am Main (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: H. Berger and W. Weber, lawyers)

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (SRB)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the decision of the Single Resolution Board of 11 April 2022 on the calculation of the 2022 ex ante contributions to the Single Resolution Fund (SRB/ES/2022/18), including the annexes thereto, in so far as the contested decision, including Annex I, Annex II and Annex III thereto, concerns the applicant’s contribution;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.




In the alternative, in the event that the Court takes the view that the contested decision is legally non-existent as a result of the use of the incorrect official language by the defendant and the action for annulment is therefore inadmissible on the ground that it is devoid of purpose, the applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare that the contested decision is legally non-existent;










—


order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant relies on nine pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-396/22 Landesbank Baden-Württemberg v SRB.
Case T-378/22: Action brought on 29 June 2022 — Diesel v EUIPO — Lidl Stiftung (Joggjeans)
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, clothing, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, precious metal, precious stones, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022311EN.01001701.xml










16.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/17






Action brought on 29 June 2022 — Diesel v EUIPO — Lidl Stiftung (Joggjeans)
(Case T-378/22)
(2022/C 311/20)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Diesel SpA (Breganze, Italy) (represented by: F. Celluprica, F. Fischetti and F. De Bono, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany)

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: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the word mark Joggjeans — International registration designating the European Union No 1 180 919

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 April 2022 in Case R 1073/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


uphold in its entirety the application filed by Diesel SpA and annul the contested decision;










—


order the intervener to pay the costs including all the costs of the earlier stages of these proceedings.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 60(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-377/22: Action brought on 29 June 2022 — Cayago Tec v EUIPO — iAqua (Personal watercraft, Motorboats)
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, pleasure craft








C_2022326EN.01002201.xml










29.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 326/22






Action brought on 29 June 2022 — Cayago Tec v EUIPO — iAqua (Personal watercraft, Motorboats)
(Case T-377/22)
(2022/C 326/29)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Cayago Tec GmbH (Bad Salzuflen, Germany) (represented by: J. Güell Serra, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: iAqua (Shenzen) Ltd (Shenzen, China)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Design at issue: EU design (Personal watercraft, Motorboats) — EU design No 6 611 570-0001

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 April 2022 in Case R 951/2021-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in its entirety;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener in the proceedings before EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 25(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002, in conjunction with Articles 4 and 6 of that regulation.
Case T-609/20: Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — LA International Cooperation v Commission (Pre-Accession Assistance Instrument — OLAF investigation — Commission decision imposing an administrative sanction — Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general budget of the European Union for a period of four years — Registration in the early detection and exclusion system database — Financial regulation — Unlimited jurisdiction — Proportionality of the sanction)
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, EU alert system, EU financing, European Anti-fraud Office, European Development Fund, administrative sanction, financial regulation, general budget (EU), pre-accession aid, public procurement








C_2022318EN.01003501.xml










22.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 318/35






Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — LA International Cooperation v Commission
(Case T-609/20) (1)

(Pre-Accession Assistance Instrument - OLAF investigation - Commission decision imposing an administrative sanction - Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general budget of the European Union for a period of four years - Registration in the early detection and exclusion system database - Financial regulation - Unlimited jurisdiction - Proportionality of the sanction)
(2022/C 318/47)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: LA International Cooperation Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by: B. O’Connor and M. Hommé, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Pethke, acting as Agent)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, LA International Cooperation Srl, formerly Lattanzio e Associati SpA, seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 July 2020 excluding it, for a period of four years, from participating in procurement and grant award procedures covered by the general budget of the European Union and participation in procedures for the award of funds governed by Council Regulation (EU) 2015/323 of 2 March 2015 on the financial regulation applicable to the 11th European Development Fund (OJ 2015 L 58, p. 17), and ordered the publication of that exclusion on the Commission’s website.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders LA International Cooperation Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10720 – IVANHOE CAMBRIDGE / MUBADALA / DUTCH RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENTS IV) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 263/02
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Netherlands, United Arab Emirates, economic concentration, housing, investment company, merger control, ownership, property market, real estate business








C_2022263EN.01000201.xml










8.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 263/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10720 – IVANHOE CAMBRIDGE / MUBADALA / DUTCH RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENTS IV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 263/02)
On 29 June 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 32022M10720. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 28 June 2022 2022/C 246/03
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022246EN.01000301.xml










29.6.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 246/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

28 June 2022
(2022/C 246/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0561 




JPY


Japanese yen


143,67 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4394 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86350 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,6543 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,0101 




ISK


Iceland króna


139,50 




NOK


Norwegian krone


10,3370 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,726 




HUF


Hungarian forint


398,55 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,6905 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9443 




TRY


Turkish lira


17,5891 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5210 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3565 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,2880 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6822 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4645 




KRW


South Korean won


1 361,75 




ZAR


South African rand


16,9072 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,0775 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5320 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 669,91 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,6432 




PHP


Philippine peso


57,850 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,154 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,5308 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,0880 




INR


Indian rupee


83,4080 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10775 – GBL / AFFIDEA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 260/01
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, holding company, information technology, investment company, merger control, real estate business








C_2022260EN.01000101.xml










6.7.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 260/1






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10775 – GBL / AFFIDEA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 260/01)
On 29 June 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 32022M10775. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10717 – KKR / PAI PARTNERS / BCI / REFRESCO) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 4/10
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: beverage industry, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, non-alcoholic beverage, public sector








C_2023004EN.01001001.xml










6.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 4/10






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10717 – KKR / PAI PARTNERS / BCI / REFRESCO)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 4/10)
On 29 June 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 32022M10717. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-357/21: Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — Jose A. Alfonso Arpon v EUIPO — Puma (PLUMAflex by Roal) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark PLUMAflex by Roal — Earlier EU figurative mark PUMA — Relative ground for refusal — Damage to reputation — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-06-29
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022311EN.01001101.xml










16.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/11






Judgment of the General Court of 29 June 2022 — Jose A. Alfonso Arpon v EUIPO — Puma (PLUMAflex by Roal)
(Case T-357/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark PLUMAflex by Roal - Earlier EU figurative mark PUMA - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 311/15)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Jose A. Alfonso Arpon SL (Arnedo, Spain) (represented by: C. Hernández, 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: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 April 2021 (Case R 2991/2019-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Jose A. Alfonso Arpon SL to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.