do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-504/22: Action brought on 18 August 2022 — Levantur v EUIPO — Fantasia Hotels & Resorts (Fantasia BAHIA PRINCIPE HOTELS & RESORTS)
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, catering industry, hotel industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022380EN.01002401.xml










3.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 380/24






Action brought on 18 August 2022 — Levantur v EUIPO — Fantasia Hotels & Resorts (Fantasia BAHIA PRINCIPE HOTELS & RESORTS)
(Case T-504/22)
(2022/C 380/29)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Levantur, SA (Murcia, Spain) (represented by: G. Marín Raigal, E. Armero Lavie and C. Caballero Pastor, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fantasia Hotels & Resorts, SL (Zaragoza, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Figurative mark BAHIA PRINCIPE HOTELS & RESORTS — EU trade mark No 17 365 016

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 May 2022 in Case R 1000/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and, if appropriate, the other party to the proceedings (FANTASÍA HOTELS & RESORTS, SL) to pay the costs of the present action before the General Court;










—


order the cancellation applicant, FANTASÍA HOTELS & RESORTS, SL, to pay the costs of the proceedings in Case R 1000/2021-1 and of the cancellation proceedings No. 36483 C.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Articles 16(1)(b), 7(2)(d), 8(5) and 27(4) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 and of the requirement to state reasons and the principles of legal certainty and sound administration;










—


Infringement of Articles 60(1)(c), 8(4), 95(1) and 97(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of Articles 7(2)(d) and 10(3) and (4) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 and the relevant case-law;










—


Infringement of Articles 8(1), 60(1)(c) and 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10824 – BAIN CAPITAL / HOUSE OF HR) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 325/02
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, employment service, investment company, merger control, personnel administration








C_2022325EN.01000201.xml










29.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 325/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10824 – BAIN CAPITAL / HOUSE OF HR)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 325/02)
On 18 August 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 32022M10824. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case C-552/22 P: Appeal brought on 18 August 2022 by Asociación de Delineantes de Hacienda against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 13 July 2022 in Case T-280/22, Asociación de Delineantes de Hacienda v Spain
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: damages, infringement of EU law, jurisdiction, national implementing measure, recognition of vocational training qualifications








C_2023173EN.01000902.xml










15.5.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 173/9






Appeal brought on 18 August 2022 by Asociación de Delineantes de Hacienda against the order of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 13 July 2022 in Case T-280/22, Asociación de Delineantes de Hacienda v Spain
(Case C-552/22 P)
(2023/C 173/12)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Appellant: Asociación de Delineantes de Hacienda (represented by: D. Álvarez Cabrera, abogado)

Other party to the proceedings: Kingdom of Spain
By order of 17 March 2023, the Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal as manifestly unfounded and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.
Case T-506/22: Action brought on 18 August 2022 — CrossFit v EUIPO — Pitk Pelotas (CROSSWOD EQUIPMENT)
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2022389EN.01001501.xml










10.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 389/15






Action brought on 18 August 2022 — CrossFit v EUIPO — Pitk Pelotas (CROSSWOD EQUIPMENT)
(Case T-506/22)
(2022/C 389/17)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: CrossFit LLC (Boulder, Colorado, United States) (represented by: D. Mărginean, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Pitk Pelotas, SL (Noain, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark CROSSWOD EQUIPMENT — Application for registration No 18 064 486

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 June 2022 in Case R 325/2021-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


partly annul the contested decision;










—


alter the contested decision;










—


order Pitk Pelotas, SL to pay the costs incurred by CrossFit, LLC in the present action, in the proceedings before the Board of Appeals and in the proceedings before the Opposition Division.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as the First Board of Appeal wrongly concluded that there is no likelihood of confusion with the earlier CROSSFIT trade marks;










—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as the First Board of Appeal wrongly concluded that there is no likelihood of confusion with the earlier CROSS trade mark;










—


Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as the Board of Appeal wrongly concluded that the applicant had failed to prove the reputation of its earlier CROSSFIT trademark in the EU, in connection to the services in Class 41.
Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/1424 of 18 August 2022 establishing a fisheries closure for bigeye tuna in the Atlantic Ocean for vessels flying the flag of Portugal
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, Portugal, catch by species, catch quota, fishing area, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, sea fishing, ship's flag








L_2022219EN.01000101.xml










24.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 219/1








            COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2022/1424
of 18 August 2022
         
establishing a fisheries closure for bigeye tuna in the Atlantic Ocean for vessels flying the flag of Portugal


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), and in particular Article 36(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Council Regulation (EU) 2022/109 (2) lays down quotas for 2022.












(2)


According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock of bigeye tuna in the Atlantic Ocean by vessels flying the flag of or registered in Portugal have exhausted the quota allocated for 2022.












(3)


It is therefore necessary to prohibit certain fishing activities for that stock,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1

Quota exhaustion

The fishing quota allocated for 2022 to Portugal for the stock of bigeye tuna in the Atlantic Ocean referred to in the Annex shall be deemed to be exhausted from the date set out in that Annex.


Article 2

Prohibitions

Fishing activities for the stock referred to in Article 1 by vessels flying the flag of or registered in Portugal shall be prohibited from the date set out in the Annex. In particular it shall be prohibited to retain on board, relocate, tranship or land fish from that stock caught by those vessels after that date.


Article 3

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 August 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Virginijus SINKEVIČIUS
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) 2022/109 of 27 January 2022 fixing for 2022 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in Union waters and for Union fishing vessels in certain non-Union waters (OJ L 21, 31.1.2022, p. 1).




ANNEX






No


04/TQ109




Member State


Portugal




Stock


BET/ATLANT (including BET/*ATLLL and BET/*ATLPS)




Species


Bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)




Zone


Atlantic Ocean




Closing date


25.7.2022
Case C-549/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) lodged on 18 August 2022 — X v Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Algeria, association agreement (EU), residence, survivor's benefit








C_2022463EN.01001601.xml










5.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 463/16






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep (Netherlands) lodged on 18 August 2022 — X v Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank
(Case C-549/22)
(2022/C 463/21)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: X

Defendant: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale verzekeringsbank

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 68(4) of the Association Agreement (1) be interpreted as applying to a survivor of a deceased worker who resides in Algeria and who wishes to export her survivors’ benefit to Algeria?
If so,










2.


Must Article 68(4) of the Association Agreement, having regard to its wording and to its purpose and nature, be interpreted as having direct effect, so that persons to whom that provision applies are entitled to rely on it directly before the Member States’ courts to have rules of national law which are contrary to it disapplied?
If so,










3.


Must Article 68(4) of the Association Agreement be interpreted as precluding the application of the country-of-residence principle, as referred to in Article 17(3) of the Algemene nabestaandenwet (General Law on Survivors), which results in a restriction on the export of the survivors’ benefit to Algeria?






(1)  Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, of the other part (OJ 2005 L 265, p. 2).
Case T-523/22: Action brought on 18 August 2022 — Sberbank Europe v Council and Others
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, bank, bank resolution, company in difficulties, principle of proportionality








C_2022432EN.01003002.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/30






Action brought on 18 August 2022 — Sberbank Europe v Council and Others
(Case T-523/22)
(2022/C 432/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sberbank Europe AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: O. Behrends, lawyer)

Defendants: Council of the European Union, European Commission, Single Resolution Board

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare void pursuant to Article 264 TFEU the contested decision; (1) and










—


order the SRB, the Commission and the Council to bear the applicant’s costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on nine pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the SRB exceeded its competence by adopting a decision with respect to the applicant.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the SRB infringed essential procedural requirements with respect to the applicant.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by a number of substantive defects.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging that the SRB failed to consider appropriately alternative measures pursuant to Article 18(1)(b) SRMR. (2)











5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging that the SRB failed to choose the least burdensome option in the context of resolution action with respect to the applicant.










6.


Sixth plea in law, alleging that the SRB violated substantive and procedural rules governing the sale of business tool, including Article 20 SRMR.










7.


Seventh plea in law, alleging that the SRB violated the principle of proportionality and committed a manifest error of assessment with respect to potential alternative solutions.










8.


Eighth plea in law, alleging that the SRB failed to contact the applicant’s or Sberbank Slovenia’s management in relation to Article 13(3) SRMR.










9.


Ninth plea in law, alleging that the SRB failed to follow the resolution plan without any plausible justification.






(1)  The decision contested by the applicant in this case is the SRB’s decision of 1 March 2022 (SRB/EES/2022/20) with respect to the Slovenian subsidiary of the applicant (Sberbank banka d.d.) including, if applicable, the approval of such decision by the Commission and/or the Council.

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 17 August 2022 2022/C 314/03
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2022314EN.01000301.xml










18.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

17 August 2022
(2022/C 314/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0164 




JPY


Japanese yen


137,36 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4377 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,84208 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,5617 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9686 




ISK


Iceland króna


140,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,8428 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,566 




HUF


Hungarian forint


404,28 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,7078 




RON


Romanian leu


4,8825 




TRY


Turkish lira


18,2568 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,4655 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,3117 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


7,9705 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6165 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4051 




KRW


South Korean won


1 337,02 




ZAR


South African rand


16,9125 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


6,8917 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5071 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 015,81 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,5413 




PHP


Philippine peso


56,772 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


36,052 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,2838 




MXN


Mexican peso


20,3825 




INR


Indian rupee


80,7555 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10408 – AIP / ALVANCE DUFFEL TARGET BUSINESS)
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: aluminium, economic concentration, industrial enterprise, investment company, iron and steel industry, merger control, metallurgical industry








C_202301551EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/1551


15.12.2023






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10408 – AIP / ALVANCE DUFFEL TARGET BUSINESS)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2023/1551)

On 18 August 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 (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). 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 32022M10408. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  
            OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1551/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-550/22 P: Appeal brought on 18 August 2022 by Compass Tex Ltd against the order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 28 June 2022 in Case T-704/21, Compass Tex Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023045EN.01000403.xml










6.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 45/4






Appeal brought on 18 August 2022 by Compass Tex Ltd against the order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) delivered on 28 June 2022 in Case T-704/21, Compass Tex Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office
(Case C-550/22 P)
(2023/C 45/08)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Compass Tex Ltd (represented by: M. Gail, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office
By order of 7 December 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) did not allow the appeal to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1425 of 18 August 2022 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [‘Alubia de Anguiano’ (PDO)]
Date: 2022-08-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission
Subjects: Rioja, Spain, designation of origin, dried product, labelling, leguminous vegetable, product designation, seed








L_2022220EN.01000101.xml










25.8.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 220/1








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1425
of 18 August 2022
         
entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [‘Alubia de Anguiano’ (PDO)]


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,


Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).












(2)


As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ should therefore be entered in the register,





HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:



Article 1
The name ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.
The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).


Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 August 2022.


For the Commission,


On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI
            

Member of the Commission






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 182, 4.5.2022, p. 20.

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).