do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-371/21 P: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 July 2022 — SGI Studio Galli Ingegneria Srl v European Commission (Appeal — Arbitration clause — Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) — Grant agreement — The MARSOL Project — Eligible costs — European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) investigation report finding certain expenses incurred to be ineligible — Repayment of sums paid — Right to access OLAF’s file — Right to be heard — Burden of proof — Distortion of the facts — Probative value — Principle of proportionality — Unjust enrichment)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, Framework Programme for Research and Development, access to EU information, eligibility criteria, principle of proportionality, proof, research and development, rights of the defence








C_2022359EN.01000901.xml










19.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 359/9






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 14 July 2022 — SGI Studio Galli Ingegneria Srl v European Commission
(Case C-371/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Arbitration clause - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - Grant agreement - The MARSOL Project - Eligible costs - European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) investigation report finding certain expenses incurred to be ineligible - Repayment of sums paid - Right to access OLAF’s file - Right to be heard - Burden of proof - Distortion of the facts - Probative value - Principle of proportionality - Unjust enrichment)
(2022/C 359/09)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: SGI Studio Galli Ingegneria Srl (represented by: V. Catenacci, F.S. Marini and R. Viglietta, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà and S. Romoli, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders SGI Studio Galli Ingegneria Srl to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 310, 2.8.2021.
Case T-706/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, clothing, construction equipment, drilling equipment, education, machine tool, pump, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022432EN.01002901.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/29






Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerkstatt)
(Case T-706/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Stahlwerkstatt - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 432/35)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Okan Balaban (Bornheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Schaaf, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez and M. Eberl, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment in part and the variation of the examiner’s decision of 27 August 2020 and of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 September 2021 (Case R 1987/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Okan Balaban to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10872 – GEELY / RENAULT / RENAULT KOREA MOTORS) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 351/03
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, merger control, motor vehicle industry








C_2022351EN.01000401.xml










14.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10872 – GEELY / RENAULT / RENAULT KOREA MOTORS)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 351/03)

1.   
On 5 September 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Geely Automobile Holdings Limited (‘Geely’, Cayman Islands), a subsidiary of Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd. (PR China),










—


Renault S.A.S. (‘Renault’, France), a subsidiary of Renault S.A. (France).




Geely and Renault will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Renault Korea Motors Co., Ltd. (‘Target’), a company incorporated and active in South Korea currently held by a subsidiary of Renault and Samsung. The Target is currently solely controlled by Renault.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:
Geely manufactures and sells passenger cars worldwide,
Renault manufactures and sells passenger cars and light commercial vehicles, supplies automotive parts and provides mobility services.


3.   
The business activities of the Target are the following:
Manufacture and sales of passenger cars in South Korea and export of passenger cars into adjacent markets in Asia.


4.   
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


5.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.10872 – GEELY / RENAULT / RENAULT KOREA MOTORS
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 22964301
Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Case T-416/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Itinerant Show Room v EUIPO — Save the Duck (ITINERANT) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark ITINERANT — Earlier EU figurative mark representing a singing duck in a circle — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Similarity — Reputation — Link — Undue advantage — Lack of due cause — Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 — Document produced for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Inadmissibility)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022432EN.01002302.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/23






Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Itinerant Show Room v EUIPO — Save the Duck (ITINERANT)
(Case T-416/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ITINERANT - Earlier EU figurative mark representing a singing duck in a circle - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Similarity - Reputation - Link - Undue advantage - Lack of due cause - Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Document produced for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Inadmissibility)
(2022/C 432/27)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Itinerant Show Room Srl (San Giorgio in Bosco, Italy) (represented by: E. Montelione, 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: Save the Duck SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. De Vietro, 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 6 May 2021 (Case R 997/2020-5), relating to opposition proceedings between the intervener and the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Itinerant Show Room Srl to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office and by Save the Duck SpA.






(1)  OJ C 357, 6.9.2021.
Case C-594/22 P: Appeal brought on 14 September 2022 by Gugler France against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 13 July 2022 in Case T-147/21, Gugler France v EUIPO — Gugler (GUGLER)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, building, building materials, glass, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023035EN.01002301.xml










30.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 35/23






Appeal brought on 14 September 2022 by Gugler France against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 13 July 2022 in Case T-147/21, Gugler France v EUIPO — Gugler (GUGLER)
(Case C-594/22 P)
(2023/C 35/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Gugler France (represented by: S. Guerlain, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Alexander Gugler
By order of 5 December 2022, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Gugler France should bear its own costs.
Case T-705/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerk) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark STAHLWERK — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, air conditioning, clothing, electricity storage device, hand tool, machine tool, metalworking, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022432EN.01002801.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/28






Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Balaban v EUIPO (Stahlwerk)
(Case T-705/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark STAHLWERK - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 432/34)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Okan Balaban (Bornheim, Germany) (represented by: T. Schaaf, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez and M. Eberl, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment in part and the variation of the examiner’s decision of 18 November 2020 and of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 September 2021 (Case R 77/2021-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Okan Balaban to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Case T-423/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Gioioso v EUIPO — Maxi Di (MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT — Earlier national figurative mark GIOIA DI MARE — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dried product, fish, frozen product, preserved product, processed food product, registered trade mark, smoked product, trade-mark law








C_2022432EN.01002501.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/25






Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Gioioso v EUIPO — Maxi Di (MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT)
(Case T-423/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark MARE GIOIOSO di Sebastiano IMPORT EXPORT - Earlier national figurative mark GIOIA DI MARE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 432/29)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Sebastiano Gioioso (Fasano, Italy) (represented by: F. Amati, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Maxi Di Srl (Belfiore, Italy)

Re:

By his application based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 10 May 2021 (Case R 1650/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


dismisses the action.










2.


orders Mr Sebastiano Gioioso to bear the costs.






(1)  OJ C 357, 6.9.2021.
Case T-686/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Task Food v EUIPO — Foodtastic (ENERGY CAKE) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark ENERGY CAKE — Declaration of invalidity — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Descriptive character — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/2011))
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, cereal product, confectionery product, foodstuff, registered trade mark, retail trade, sports equipment, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2022432EN.01002702.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/27






Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Task Food v EUIPO — Foodtastic (ENERGY CAKE)
(Case T-686/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark ENERGY CAKE - Declaration of invalidity - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/2011))
(2022/C 432/33)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: Task Food s.r.o. (Bratislava, Slovakia), authorised to replace energy cake GmbH (represented by: A. Bernegger, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Foodtastic GmbH (Dortmund, Germany)

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 11 August 2021 (Case R 2324/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Authorises Task Food s.r.o. to replace energy cake GmbH as applicant;










2.


Dismisses the action;










3.


Orders Task Food to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 513, 20.12.2021.
Case T-567/22: Action brought on 14 September 2022 — ATPN v Commission
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU environmental policy, climate change policy, disclosure of information, economic activity, economic instrument for the environment, financial institution, financial market, insurance company, investment, technical specification








C_2022418EN.01005201.xml










31.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 418/52






Action brought on 14 September 2022 — ATPN v Commission
(Case T-567/22)
(2022/C 418/67)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Association Trinationale de Protection Nucléaire (ATPN) (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Lepage, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the present application admissible and well founded;










—


annul Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1214 of 9 March 2022 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 as regards economic activities in certain energy sectors and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2178 as regards specific public disclosures for those economic activities (1);










—


order the Commission to pay the amount of EUR 3 000 to the applicant.





Pleas in law and main arguments

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






1.


First plea in law, alleging irregularity of the procedure in that it infringed the provisions of Regulation No 2020/852 of 18 June 2020. (2)











2.


Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the rules of taxonomy.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the provisions of Article 19 of Regulation No 2020/852 of 18 June 2020 were infringed and that the objectives were insufficiently ambitious.










4.


Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the general criteria of Community law.










5.


Fifth plea in law, alleging incompatibility between investments in nuclear energy and green investments with regard to financial information.






(1)  OJ 2022 L 188, p. 1.

(2)  Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OJ 2020 L 198, p. 13).
Case T-498/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Lotion v EUIPO (BLACK IRISH) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark BLACK IRISH — Absolute grounds for refusal — No distinctive character — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Equal treatment — Obligation to state reasons — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, coffee, instant product, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_2022432EN.01002502.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/25






Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Lotion v EUIPO (BLACK IRISH)
(Case T-498/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark BLACK IRISH - Absolute grounds for refusal - No distinctive character - Descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Equal treatment - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2022/C 432/30)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Lotion LLC (Woodland Hills, California, United States) (represented by: A. Deutsch, lawyer)

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

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 Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 June 2021 (Case R 199/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Lotion LLC to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 391, 27.9.2021.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10792 – PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL / SWEDISH MATCH) (Text with EEA relevance) 2022/C 351/06
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Norway, Sweden, distributor, economic concentration, merger control, subsidiary, tobacco, tobacco industry








C_2022351EN.01001001.xml










14.9.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/10






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.10792 – PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL / SWEDISH MATCH)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2022/C 351/06)

1.   
On 6 September 2022, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


Philip Morris Holland Holdings B.V. (‘PMHH’, The Netherlands), controlled by Philip Morris International Inc. (‘PMI’, United States),










—


Swedish Match AB (‘Swedish Match’, Sweden).




PMI will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of Swedish Match.
The concentration is accomplished by way of public bid announced on 11 May 2022.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


PMI is an international tobacco company that manufactures and sells cigarettes and other combustible tobacco products, as well as other tobacco and nicotine-containing products and accessories.










—


Swedish Match manufactures and sells various oral tobacco products, nicotine pouches, and pouch products with neither nicotine nor tobacco, as well as cigars, matches, ligthers and other fire-related products. Swedish Match is also involved in the distribution of tobacco and nicotine-containing products in Sweden and Norway through a subsidiary.






3.   

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.



4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.10792 – PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL / SWEDISH MATCH
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 22964301
Postal address:





European Commission




Directorate-General for Competition




Merger Registry




1049 Bruxelles/Brussel




BELGIQUE/BELGIË







(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).
Case T-457/19: Order of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Synthomer v Commission
Date: 2022-09-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: State aid, United Kingdom, control of State aid, corporation tax, equal treatment, foreign enterprise, group of companies, tax avoidance, tax exemption, tax law








C_2022432EN.01003901.xml










14.11.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 432/39






Order of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Synthomer v Commission
(Case T-457/19) (1)

(2022/C 432/46)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 312, 16.9.2019.