do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-91/20: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — WT v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Disciplinary proceedings — Disciplinary penalty in the form of a reprimand — Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials — Principle of good administration — Right to be heard — Obligation to state reasons — Reasonable time — Psychological harassment — Principle of legal certainty — Material and non-material damage)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, administrative sanction, disciplinary proceedings, harassment at work, indemnification, principle of legal certainty, psychological harassment, rights of the defence








C_2022418EN.01001701.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/17






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — WT v Commission
(Case T-91/20) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary penalty in the form of a reprimand - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Principle of good administration - Right to be heard - Obligation to state reasons - Reasonable time - Psychological harassment - Principle of legal certainty - Material and non-material damage)
(2022/C 418/20)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: WT (represented by: V. Villante, D. Rovetta and D. Birkenmaier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A.-C. Simon and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 17 April 2019 by which the Commission imposed on her a disciplinary penalty in the form of a reprimand and, second, compensation for the non-material and material damage which she claims to have suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders WT to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 262, 10.8.2020.
Case T-529/20: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — LR v EIB (Civil service — EIB staff — Remuneration — Resettlement allowance — Establishment of a member of staff’s residence in his or her own home after leaving the service of the EIB — Second indent of the first paragraph of Article 13 of the EIB Staff Rules — Concept of ‘home’ — Literal interpretation according to a prevailing language version — Unlimited jurisdiction — Dispute of a financial character — Admissibility)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, allowances and expenses, residence, termination of employment








C_2022418EN.01001901.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/19






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — LR v EIB
(Case T-529/20) (1)

(Civil service - EIB staff - Remuneration - Resettlement allowance - Establishment of a member of staff’s residence in his or her own home after leaving the service of the EIB - Second indent of the first paragraph of Article 13 of the EIB Staff Rules - Concept of ‘home’ - Literal interpretation according to a prevailing language version - Unlimited jurisdiction - Dispute of a financial character - Admissibility)
(2022/C 418/23)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: LR (represented by: J.L. Gómez de la Cruz Coll and M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: A.V. García Sánchez and I. Zanin, acting as Agents, and by A. Manzaneque Valverde and J. Rivas de Andrés, lawyers)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU and Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 9 January 2020 refusing him the benefit of the resettlement allowance and, secondly, an order that the EIB pay the resettlement allowance, together with default interest calculated at the European Central Bank (ECB) rate, increased by two percentage points.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 9 January 2020 refusing to grant LR the benefit of the resettlement allowance;










2.


Orders the EIB to pay to LR the allowance referred to in point 1 of the operative part, plus default interest, from 4 September 2019 until the date of actual payment, at the rate set by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its main refinancing operations and applicable during the period concerned, increased by two percentage points;










3.


Orders the EIB to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 339, 12.10.2020.
Case T-155/21: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Völkl v EUIPO — Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) (Völkl) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark Völkl — Earlier EU word mark Völkl — Earlier EU word mark VÖLKL — Relative ground for invalidity — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity between the goods — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2022418EN.01002401.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/24






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Völkl v EUIPO — Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) (Völkl)
(Case T-155/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Völkl - Earlier EU word mark Völkl - Earlier EU word mark VÖLKL - Relative ground for invalidity - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the goods - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 418/30)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Völkl GmbH & Co. KG (Erding, Germany) (represented by: C. Raßmann, M. Suether and F. Adinolfi, lawyers)

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: Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) GmbH (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Bauer, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on 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 11 January 2021 (Case R 568/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Völkl GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Case T-470/20: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — DD v FRA (Civil service — Temporary staff — Disciplinary regime — Removal from post — Opening of an administrative investigation — Initiation of disciplinary proceedings — Requirement for impartiality — Error of law — Manifest error of assessment — Articles 11, 12 and 21 of the Staff Regulations — Duty of loyalty — Legal certainty — Freedom of expression — Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Principle of sound administration — Duty of care — Presumption of innocence — Right to be heard — Reasonable period of time — Proportionality of the sanction)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrative sanction, disciplinary proceedings, dismissal, freedom of expression, indemnification, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, servant (EU)








C_2022418EN.01001802.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/18






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — DD v FRA
(Case T-470/20) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary staff - Disciplinary regime - Removal from post - Opening of an administrative investigation - Initiation of disciplinary proceedings - Requirement for impartiality - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Articles 11, 12 and 21 of the Staff Regulations - Duty of loyalty - Legal certainty - Freedom of expression - Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Principle of sound administration - Duty of care - Presumption of innocence - Right to be heard - Reasonable period of time - Proportionality of the sanction)
(2022/C 418/22)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: DD (represented by: L. Levi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (represented by: M. O’Flaherty, acting as Agent, and by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant, DD, seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) of 12 November 2019 by which it imposed on him the disciplinary sanction of removal from post (‘the decision to remove from post’) and of the decision of 15 April 2020 rejecting the complaint against the decision to remove from post (‘the decision rejecting the complaint’) and, secondly, compensation for the material and non-material damage which he has suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders DD to pay, in addition to his own costs, those incurred by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA).






(1)  OJ C 339, 12.10.2020.
Case T-156/21: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Völkl v EUIPO — Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) (Marker Völkl) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark Marker Völkl — Earlier EU word mark VÖLKL — Relative ground for invalidity — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity between the goods — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, leather, personal effects, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2022418EN.01002402.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/24






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Völkl v EUIPO — Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) (Marker Völkl)
(Case T-156/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark Marker Völkl - Earlier EU word mark VÖLKL - Relative ground for invalidity - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the goods - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 418/31)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Völkl GmbH & Co. KG (Erding, Germany) (represented by: C. Raßmann, M. Suether and F. Adinolfi, lawyers)

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: Marker Dalbello Völkl (International) GmbH (Baar, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Bauer, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on 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 11 January 2021 (Case R 0055/2020-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Völkl GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.
Case T-75/22: Order of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Prigozhin v Council (Action for annulment — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures taken against serious human rights violations and abuses — Grounds of the decisions mentioning the applicant’s name as the financier of the Wagner Group — Assessments made in the grounds of the decisions — Acts not open to appeal — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, economic sanctions, human rights, international sanctions, natural person, paramilitary force








C_2022418EN.01003601.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/36






Order of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Prigozhin v Council
(Case T-75/22) (1)

(Action for annulment - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against serious human rights violations and abuses - Grounds of the decisions mentioning the applicant’s name as the financier of the Wagner Group - Assessments made in the grounds of the decisions - Acts not open to appeal - Inadmissibility)
(2022/C 418/49)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin (Saint Petersburg, Russia) (represented by: Mr Cessieux, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.-C. Cadilhac and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/2197 of 13 December 2021 amending Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses (OJ 2021 L 445 I, p. 17), and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2195 of 13 December 2021 implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 concerning restrictive measures against serious human rights violations and abuses (OJ 2021 L 445 I, p. 10), in so far as those two decisions name him as the financier of the Wagner Group.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed as inadmissible.










2.


Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.






(1)  OJ C 148, 4.4.2022.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10871 – E.ON / FSI / WESTENERGIE BREITBAND) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 367/02
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Germany, banking, economic concentration, energy industry, glass fibre, investment company, merger control, provision of services, transmission network








C_2022367EN.01000201.xml










26.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 367/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10871 – E.ON / FSI / WESTENERGIE BREITBAND)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 367/02)
On 7 September 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 32022M10871. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-521/21: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — 6Minutes Media v EUIPO — ad pepper media International (ad pepper the e-advertising network) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark ad pepper the e-advertising network — Genuine use of the mark — Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 [now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, consultancy, data processing, registered trade mark, software, trade-mark law








C_2022418EN.01003002.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/30






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — 6Minutes Media v EUIPO — ad pepper media International (ad pepper the e-advertising network)
(Case T-521/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark ad pepper the e-advertising network - Genuine use of the mark - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 [now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 418/40)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: 6Minutes Media GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: N. Marquard and P. Koch, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: ad pepper media International NV (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: S. Lux, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on 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 18 June 2021 (Case R 1621/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders 6Minutes Media GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
Case T-642/19: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium v Commission (State aid — Aid implemented by Belgium in favour of JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium — Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery — Advantage — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Belgium, Brussels region, State aid, advertising, control of State aid, reimbursement of aid, services of general interest








C_2022398EN.01002301.xml










17.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 398/23






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium v Commission
(Case T-642/19) (1)

(State aid - Aid implemented by Belgium in favour of JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Advantage - Obligation to state reasons)
(2022/C 398/25)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Winckler, G. Babin and B. Cambier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braga da Cruz, C. Georgieva and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Clear Channel Belgium (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: P. de Bandt, M. Gherghinaru and L. Panepinto, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 4466 final of 24 June 2019 on State aid SA.33078 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by Belgium in favour of JC Decaux Belgium Publicité.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JCDecaux Street Furniture Belgium to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;










3.


Orders Clear Channel Belgium to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.
Case T-651/20: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — KL v EIB (Civil service — Personnel of the EIB — Unjustified absences — Failure to report for medical examination — Action for annulment and for damages)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, absenteeism, indemnification, medical examination, paid leave, sick leave, worker with disabilities








C_2022418EN.01002001.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/20






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — KL v EIB
(Case T-651/20) (1)

(Civil service - Personnel of the EIB - Unjustified absences - Failure to report for medical examination - Action for annulment and for damages)
(2022/C 418/24)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: KL (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Investment Bank (represented by: G. Faedo and I. Zanin, acting as Agents, and A. Duron, lawyer)

Re:

By his action, based on Article 270 TFEU read in conjunction with Article 50a of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 28 February 2020 to the effect that his absences from the medical examinations of 23 December 2019, 3 and 28 February 2020 were unjustified absences under Article 3.6 of the Annex X to the EIB Staff Rules, adopted in implementation of the EIB's Staff Regulations, and, secondly, compensation for the damage he suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the European Investment Bank (EIB) of 28 February 2020 that KL's absences from medical examinations on 23 December 2019, 3 and 28 February 2020 were unjustified absences under Article 3.6 of Annex X to EIB Staff Rules, adopted in implementation of the EIB Staff Regulations;










2.


Dismisses the remainder of the action;










3.


Orders the EIB to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 443, 21.12.2020.
Case T-730/21: Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Łosowski v EUIPO — Skawiński (KOMBI) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark KOMBI — Earlier EU word mark kombii — Relative ground for invalidity — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Similarity of the goods and services — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Reliance on an individual right to use the name ‘kombi’ under national law)
Date: 2022-09-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, music, performing arts, publication, recording, recording medium, registered trade mark, sound reproduction equipment, teaching materials, trade-mark law








C_2022418EN.01003302.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/33






Judgment of the General Court of 7 September 2022 — Łosowski v EUIPO — Skawiński (KOMBI)
(Case T-730/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark KOMBI - Earlier EU word mark kombii - Relative ground for invalidity - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the goods and services - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Reliance on an individual right to use the name ‘kombi’ under national law)
(2022/C 418/45)
Language of the case: Polish

Parties


Applicant: Sławomir Łosowski (Gdańsk, Poland) (represented by: K. Czub, 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: Grzegorz Skawiński (Sopot, Poland) (represented by: J. Aftyka, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 September 2021 (Case R 381/2017-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Sławomir Łowoski to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 24, 17.1.2022.