do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/1980 of 19 October 2022 amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/626 establishing the InvestEU Portal and setting out its technical specifications (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EFTA countries, EU investment, EU programme, Internet site, information system, investment project, investment promotion, on line data service, technical specification








L_2022272EN.01002101.xml










20.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 272/21








            COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2022/1980
of 19 October 2022
         
amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/626 establishing the InvestEU Portal and setting out its technical specifications
(Text with EEA relevance)


THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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


Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the InvestEU Programme and amending Regulation (EU) 2015/1017 (1), and in particular Article 26 thereof,

Whereas:







(1)


Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/626 (2) establishing the InvestEU Portal should be amended in order to enable projects from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) States to be published on the InvestEU Portal.












(2)


Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/626 should also be amended in order to clarify the maturity of projects that are eligible to be published on the InvestEU Portal,





HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:



Article 1
Article 2 of Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/626 is amended as follows:






(1)


point (e) is replaced by the following:






‘(e)


the project shall be situated in the Union, in an European Free Trade Association (EFTA) State or in an overseas country or territory linked to a Member State as set out in Annex II to the Treaty. In the case of a cross-border project, the principal part of the implementation of project shall take place in the Union, in the EFTA States or in an overseas country or territory linked to a Member State as set out in Annex II to the Treaty;’;














(2)


point (g) is replaced by the following:






‘(g)


the project implementation already commenced or is expected to commence within three years from the date of submission to the InvestEU Portal;’.










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




Done at Brussels, 19 October 2022.


For the Commission


The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN
            





(1)  
            OJ L 107, 26.3.2021, p. 30.

(2)  Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/626 of 14 April 2021 establishing the InvestEU Portal and setting out its technical specifications (OJ L 131, 16.4.2021, p. 183).
Case T-231/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Praesidiad v EUIPO — Zaun (Post) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a post — Ground for invalidity — Failure to comply with the requirements for protection — Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function — Article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: building materials, designs and models, product design








C_2023007EN.01002501.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/25






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Praesidiad v EUIPO — Zaun (Post)
(Case T-231/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a post - Ground for invalidity - Failure to comply with the requirements for protection - Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - Features of appearance of a product solely dictated by its technical function - Article 8(1) of Regulation No 6/2002)
(2023/C 7/31)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Praesidiad Holding (Zwevegem, Belgium) (represented by M. Rieger-Jansen and D. Op de Beeck, lawyers)

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: Zaun Ltd (Wolverhampton, United Kingdom) (represented by O. Petter and J. Saladin, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and the alteration of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 15 February 2021 (Case R 2068/2019-3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 15 February 2021 (Case R 2068/2019-3);










2.


Rejects the application filed by Zaun Ltd on 27 March 2018 for a declaration that the design registered under the number 127204-0001 is invalid;










3.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Praesidiad Holding;










4.


Orders Zaun to bear its own costs.






(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.10702 – KPS CAPITAL PARTNERS / REAL ALLOY EUROPE)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: aluminium, economic concentration, flat product, investment company, iron and steel industry, merger control








C_202301026EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/1026


16.11.2023






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.10702 – KPS CAPITAL PARTNERS / REAL ALLOY EUROPE)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2023/1026)

On 19 October 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) in conjunction with Article 6(2) 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 32022M10702. 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/2023/1026/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Notice to economic operators New round of requests for the suspension of the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on certain industrial and agricultural products 2022/C 402/10
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: CCT duties, agricultural product, common customs tariff, import (EU), industrial product, suspension of customs duties








C_2022402EN.01001701.xml










19.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/17






Notice to economic operators
New round of requests for the suspension of the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on certain industrial and agricultural products
(2022/C 402/10)
Economic operators are informed that the Commission has received requests in accordance with the administrative arrangements foreseen in the Commission Communication concerning autonomous tariff suspensions and quotas (2011/C 363/02) (1) for the July round of 2023.
The list of the products for which a duty suspension is requested is now available on the Commission's thematic (Europa) website on the customs union (2).
Economic operators are also informed that the deadline for objections against new requests to reach the Commission, via the national administrations, is 16 December 2022 which is the date of the second scheduled meeting of the Economic Tariff Questions Group.
Interested operators are advised to consult the list regularly in order to be informed on the status as the requests.
More information on the autonomous tariff suspension procedure can be found on the Europa website:
Suspensions (Autonomous Tariff Suspensions) (europa.eu)


(1)  OJ C 363, 13.12.2011, p. 6.

(2)  Suspensions - Home Page (europa.eu)
Case T-652/22: Action brought on 19 October 2022 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — MHCS (Shade of the colour orange)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, champagne, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2022472EN.01004501.xml










12.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 472/45






Action brought on 19 October 2022 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — MHCS (Shade of the colour orange)
(Case T-652/22)
(2022/C 472/52)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: M. Kefferpütz and K. Wagner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: MHCS (Épernay, France)

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: European Union trade mark No 747 949

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 August 2022 in Case R 118/2022-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO and the intervener to bear their own costs;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs incurred by the applicant;










—


in the alternative, if the trade mark at issue is not declared invalid, refer the case back to the Board of Appeal.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 and of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Inadmissible interpretation of the trade mark at issue by reference to external circumstances;










—


Unlawful disregard of the description provided in defining the subject-matter of the trade mark at issue;










—


Erroneous assumption that the graphic representation as such meets the requirement of Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94;










—


Erroneous assumption that EUIPO had set legitimate expectations;










—


Erroneous determination of the relevant public and its degree of attention;










—


Incorrect restriction of the relevant market to champagne wines;










—


Erroneous interpretation of the concept of acquisition of distinctiveness through use and disregard of the relevance of market surveys;










—


Disregard of relevant observations submitted by the applicant;










—


Insufficient basis as far as distinctiveness for Greece, Portugal Luxembourg and Ireland was assumed.
Case T-271/20: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — JS v SRB (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — Time limit for complaints — Admissibility — Psychological harassment — Article 12a of the Staff Regulations — Request for assistance — Article 24 of the Staff Regulations — Rejection of the request — Absence of prima facie evidence — Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff — Liability)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: evidence, harassment at work, indemnification, psychological harassment, servant (EU), staff regulations (EU)








C_2023007EN.01002002.xml










9.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 7/20






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — JS v SRB
(Case T-271/20) (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Time limit for complaints - Admissibility - Psychological harassment - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Rejection of the request - Absence of prima facie evidence - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Liability)
(2023/C 7/25)
Language of the case: English

Parties


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

Defendant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: L. Forestier and H. Ehlers, acting as Agents, and by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) of 14 June 2019 rejecting his request for assistance submitted on 2 May 2019 and, in so far as necessary, of the decision of the SRB of 23 January 2020 rejecting his complaint against the decision of 14 June 2019 and, second, compensation for the harm which he claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders JS to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 247, 27.7.2020.
Notice amending the addendum to the notice of open competitions – EPSO/AD/375/20 – Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/376/20 – Greek-language (EL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/377/20 – French-language (FR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/378/20 – Croatian-language (HR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/379/20 – Polish-language (PL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) (OJ C 444 A, 22.12.2020)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: European Personnel Selection Office
Subjects: Croatia, Denmark, France, Greece, Poland, administrator, competition (EU), information profession, legal profession, recruitment








CA2022402EN.01000101.xml










19.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CA 402/1






Notice amending the addendum to the notice of open competitions – EPSO/AD/375/20 – Danish-language (DA) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/376/20 – Greek-language (EL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/377/20 – French-language (FR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/378/20 – Croatian-language (HR) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) – EPSO/AD/379/20 – Polish-language (PL) lawyer-linguists (AD 7) (1)

(
Official Journal of the European Union C 444 A of 22 December 2020
)
(2022/C 402 A/01)
On page 7, after the last subparagraph of Section 6, the following paragraph is added:







‘7.


By derogation from Section 6, for competitions EPSO/AD/376/20, EPSO/AD/377/20, and EPSO/AD/379/20, the procedure for SCBI shall consist of an online meeting with two Selection Board Members who will interview, observe, and assess the performance of each candidate and score the competences covered by the test. No interviewer will be present in addition to the Selection Board Members. The rest of the provisions of Section 6 remain applicable.’







(1)  OJ C 72 A, 5.3.2020.
Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/408 of 10 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (Official Journal of the European Union L 84 of 11 March 2022)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, international sanctions, legal person, natural person, territorial dispute, territorial law








L_2022271EN.01002401.xml










19.10.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 271/24







Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/408 of 10 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

(
Official Journal of the European Union L 84 of 11 March 2022
)


On page 9, table column ‘Identifying information’, row 131:
for:


                  ‘DOB: 10.5.1980 or 21.10.1983
                  ’,

read:


                  ‘DOB: 21.10.1983
                  ’.
Case T-716/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Kaczorowska v EUIPO — Groupe Marcelle (MAESELLE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark MAESELLE — Earlier EU figurative mark MARCELLE — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, hairdressing and beauty care, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2022482EN.01001901.xml










19.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 482/19






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Kaczorowska v EUIPO — Groupe Marcelle (MAESELLE)
(Case T-716/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark MAESELLE - Earlier EU figurative mark MARCELLE - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2022/C 482/27)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Katarzyna Kaczorowska (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: P. Kurcman, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Chylińska and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Groupe Marcelle Inc. (Lachine, Quebec, Canada)

Re:

By her action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 September 2021 (Case R 670/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ms Katarzyna Kaczorowska to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Case T-467/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — DBM Videovertrieb v EUIPO — Nube (Lío) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — European Union figurative mark Lío — Absolute ground for invalidity — Bad faith — Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, miscellaneous industries, personal effects, precious metal, precious stones, public relations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, work of art








C_2022472EN.01003802.xml










12.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 472/38






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — DBM Videovertrieb v EUIPO — Nube (Lío)
(Case T-467/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union figurative mark Lío - Absolute ground for invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2022/C 472/44)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: DBM Videovertrieb GmbH (Wesel, Germany) (represented by: J. Fusbahn and D. Dawirs, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: N. Lamsters and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Nube, SL (Ibiza, Spain) (represented by: J. Gracia Albero and R. Ahijón Lana, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under 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 2 June 2021 (Case R 1220/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders DBM Videovertrieb GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 382, 20.9.2021.
Case T-437/21: Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Greenwich Polo Club v EUIPO — Lifestyle Equities (GREENWICH POLO CLUB) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark GREENWICH POLO CLUB — Earlier EU word mark BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal — Article 71 of Regulation 2017/1001 — Article 27(2) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, clothing, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, optical industry, personal effects, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_2022482EN.01001801.xml










19.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 482/18






Judgment of the General Court of 19 October 2022 — Greenwich Polo Club v EUIPO — Lifestyle Equities (GREENWICH POLO CLUB)
(Case T-437/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark GREENWICH POLO CLUB - Earlier EU word mark BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal - Article 71 of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(2) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
(2022/C 482/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Greenwich Polo Club, Inc. (Greenwich, Connecticut, United States) (represented by: R. Zammitt, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Lifestyle Equities CV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Terpstra, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 10 May 2021 (Case R 300/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between the intervener, Lifestyle Equities CV, and itself.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Greenwich Polo Club, Inc. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 401, 4.10.2021.