do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-81/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Sistem ecologica v Commission (Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 — Investigation into evasion of the conventional, countervailing and anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of biodiesel into the European Union — OLAF Communication to national customs authorities — OLAF investigation report — Action for annulment — Act not open to challenge — Claim for compensation — Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, anti-dumping duty, biofuel, countervailing charge, fraud against the EU, import (EU), import levy, indemnification








C_2022472EN.01003501.xml










12.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 472/35






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Sistem ecologica v Commission
(Case T-81/21) (1)

(Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 - Investigation into evasion of the conventional, countervailing and anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of biodiesel into the European Union - OLAF Communication to national customs authorities - OLAF investigation report - Action for annulment - Act not open to challenge - Claim for compensation - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals)
(2022/C 472/38)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant:‘Sistem ecologica’ production, trade and services d.o.o. Srbac (Srbac, Bosnia and Herzegovina) (represented by: D. Diris, D. Rjabynina, C. Kocks and C. Verheyen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Baquero Cruz and T. Materne, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Articles 263 and 268 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the final investigation report adopted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on 8 December 2020 and of OLAF’s decisions contained in a communication sent on 9 June 2020 to the Member States, in letters of 25 and 27 November 2020 and in letters of 8 and 21 December 2020 and, second, compensation in respect of the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders ‘Sistem ecologica’ production, trade and services d.o.o. Srbac to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 163, 3.5.2021.
Case T-486/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — H&H v EUIPO — Giuliani (Swisse) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark Swisse — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Article 51(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — No distinctive character — Trade mark of such a nature as to deceive the public — State emblem — Trade mark including badges, emblems or escutcheons — Article 7(1)(b), (g), (h) and (i) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (g), (h) and (i) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Bad faith — Statement of reasons for the application for a declaration of invalidity — Article 63(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Scope of the examination which has to be carried out by EUIPO — Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Right to be heard — Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, food supplement, medical plant, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vitamin








C_2022472EN.01003401.xml










12.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 472/34






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — H&H v EUIPO — Giuliani (Swisse)
(Case T-486/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Swisse - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Article 51(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No distinctive character - Trade mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - State emblem - Trade mark including badges, emblems or escutcheons - Article 7(1)(b), (g), (h) and (i) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b), (g), (h) and (i) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Statement of reasons for the application for a declaration of invalidity - Article 63(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Scope of the examination which has to be carried out by EUIPO - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)
(2022/C 472/37)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Health and Happiness (H&H) Hong Kong Ltd (Hong Kong, China) (represented by: D. Rose and L. Flascher, Solicitors, and N. Saunders KC)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Giuliani SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: S. de Bosio, 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 Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 May 2020 (Case R 2185/2019-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 May 2020 (Case R 2185/2019-5);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Health and Happiness (H&H) Hong Kong Ltd;










3.


Orders Giuliani SpA to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.