do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-250/19: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Tradición CZ v EUIPO — Rivero Argudo (TRADICIÓN CZ, S.L.) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark TRADICIÓN CZ, S.L. — Earlier EU word mark RIVERO CZ — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, non-alcoholic beverage, packaging, processed food product, registered trade mark, retail trade, storage, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2023071EN.01001901.xml










27.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/19






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Tradición CZ v EUIPO — Rivero Argudo (TRADICIÓN CZ, S.L.)
(Case T-250/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark TRADICIÓN CZ, S.L. - Earlier EU word mark RIVERO CZ - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2023/C 71/23)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Tradición CZ, SL (Jerez de la Frontera, Spain) (represented by: M. Aznar Alonso, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: María Dolores Rivero Argudo (Jerez de la Frontera, Spain) (represented by: A. Vela Ballesteros, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the partial annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 February 2019 (Case R 257/2018-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office of 4 February 2019 (Case R 257/2018-2) in so far as it concerns ‘wholesale and retail services in shops and via global computer networks related to vinegar’ in Class 35 of the Nice Agreement of 15 June 1957 concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks, as revised and amended;










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders Tradición CZ, SL, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Ms María Dolores Rivero Argudo each to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 187, 3.6.2019.
Corrigendum to Call for proposals 2023 – EAC/A10/2022 – Erasmus+ Programme (Official Journal of the European Union C 444 of 23 November 2022) 2022/C 485/07
Date: 2022-12-21
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, call for proposals, cooperation in the field of education, education, educational exchange, higher education, sport, student mobility, vocational training, young person








C_2022485EN.01009601.xml










21.12.2022   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 485/96






Corrigendum to Call for proposals 2023 – EAC/A10/2022 – Erasmus+ Programme

(

Official Journal of the European Union C 444 of 23 November 2022
)

(2022/C 485/07)
On page 18, in point 5 – Deadline for the submission of applications:

The following deadline for submission of applications is added for Key Action 2:







Large-scale European Sport Event


21 February 2023 at 17:00
Case C-774/22, FTI Touristik: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Nürnberg (Germany) lodged on 21 December 2022 — JX v FTI Touristik GmbH
Date: 2022-12-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, contract of carriage, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, package travel, residence, right of action, traveller








C_2023112EN.01002501.xml










27.3.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 112/25






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Nürnberg (Germany) lodged on 21 December 2022 — JX v FTI Touristik GmbH
(Case C-774/22, FTI Touristik)
(2023/C 112/32)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Nürnberg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: JX

Defendant: FTI Touristik GmbH

Question referred

Is Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Article 18(1) of the Brussels I Regulation) to be interpreted as meaning that, in addition to providing for international jurisdiction, the rule also concerns a provision on the territorial jurisdiction of national courts in matters relating to a travel contract where both the consumer, as a traveller, and the other party to the contract, the tour operator[,] have their seat in the same Member State, but the travel destination is situated not in that Member State but abroad (so-called ‘false internal cases’) with the consequence that the consumer can make contractual claims against the tour operator supplementing national provisions on jurisdiction at the court of his or her place of residence?


(1)  OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.
Case T-702/21: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Ekobulkos v Commission (State aid — Production of electricity from renewable sources — Complaint — Action for failure to act — Call to act — Admissibility — Obligation to act — None)
Date: 2022-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Bulgaria, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, electrical energy, renewable energy








C_2023071EN.01002401.xml










27.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/24






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Ekobulkos v Commission
(Case T-702/21) (1)

(State aid - Production of electricity from renewable sources - Complaint - Action for failure to act - Call to act - Admissibility - Obligation to act - None)
(2023/C 71/30)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties


Applicant: Ekobulkos EOOD (Todorichene, Bulgaria) (represented by: M. Dimitrov, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C.-M. Carrega and C. Georgieva, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 265 TFEU, the applicant, Ekobulkos EOOD, requests that the General Court declare that the European Commission unlawfully failed to adopt a position on its complaint, submitted on 21 February 2020, concerning an alleged State aid measure granted by the Republic of Bulgaria and favouring certain producers of electricity from renewable sources.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ekobulkos EOOD and the European Commission each to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 24, 17.1.2022.
Case T-43/22: Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Sanrio v EUIPO — Miroglio Fashion (SANRIO CHARACTERS) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark SANRIO CHARACTERS — Earlier EU word mark CARACTÈRE — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2022-12-21
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electrical equipment, leather, precious metal, registered trade mark, retail selling, scientific apparatus, textile industry, trade-mark law, wholesale selling








C_2023071EN.01002501.xml










27.2.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 71/25






Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Sanrio v EUIPO — Miroglio Fashion (SANRIO CHARACTERS)
(Case T-43/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark SANRIO CHARACTERS - Earlier EU word mark CARACTÈRE - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2023/C 71/32)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sanrio Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: V. Schmitz-Fohrmann, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: R. Raponi and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Miroglio Fashion Srl (Alba, Italy)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 November 2021 (Case R 2460/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 November 2021 (Case R 2460/2020-2) in so far as it concerns:






—


‘wholesaling and retailing and mail order sales services relating to the sale of bags, purses and wallets; wholesaling and retailing and mail order services relating to the sale of articles of footwear and headgear; wholesaling and retailing and mail order services relating to the sale of sporting articles’, in Class 35 of the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended;










—


‘life-saving apparatus and equipment; protection devices for personal use against accidents; divers’ masks; goggles for sports; protective helmets for sports; protective masks; ear plugs for divers; ear plugs for swimming’ in Class 9;














2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders Sanrio Co. Ltd and EUIPO to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 119, 14.3.2022.