do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-546/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services — Earlier national figurative mark ROCHEM MARINE — Relative ground for invalidity — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark — Articles 15 and 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18 and 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, anti-pollution device, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wastewater, water treatment








C_2023216EN.01004001.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/40






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services)
(Case T-546/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark R.T.S. ROCHEM Technical Services - Earlier national figurative mark ROCHEM MARINE - Relative ground for invalidity - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Articles 15 and 57(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18 and 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2023/C 216/51)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Rochem Group AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

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: Rochem Marine Srl (Genoa, Italy) (represented by: R. Gioia and L. Mansi, lawyers)

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 28 June 2021 (Case R 1544/2019-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rochem Group AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 422, 18.10.2021.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 25 April 2023 2023/C 143/03
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2023143EN.01000301.xml










26.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 143/3






Euro exchange rates (1)

25 April 2023
(2023/C 143/03)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1022 




JPY


Japanese yen


147,91 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4530 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88645 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,3045 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9786 




ISK


Iceland króna


150,30 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,6950 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


23,476 




HUF


Hungarian forint


375,42 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,5900 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9370 




TRY


Turkish lira


21,4071 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6564 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4984 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,6520 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7887 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4735 




KRW


South Korean won


1 475,70 




ZAR


South African rand


20,1501 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,6289 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 463,59 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9046 




PHP


Philippine peso


61,205 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,949 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,5729 




MXN


Mexican peso


19,8039 




INR


Indian rupee


90,3310 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-681/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Alves Casas v EUIPO — Make-Up Art Cosmetics (mccosmetics NY) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark mccosmetics NY — Earlier EU figurative mark MAC MAKE-UP ART COSMETICS — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Damage to reputation — Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, cosmetic product, food supplement, medical device, pharmaceutical product, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product








C_2023216EN.01004202.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/42






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Alves Casas v EUIPO — Make-Up Art Cosmetics (mccosmetics NY)
(Case T-681/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark mccosmetics NY - Earlier EU figurative mark MAC MAKE-UP ART COSMETICS - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2023/C 216/55)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ana Maria Alves Casas (Porto, Portugal) (represented by: A. Martins, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Make-Up Art Cosmetics, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: I. Fowler, B. Worbes and I. Junkar, lawyers)

Re:

By her action under 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 20 August 2021 (Case R 2398/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ms Ana Maria Alves Casas to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 2, 3.1.2022.
Case T-147/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Pinar Kuruyemiş Gida Ve Ihtiyaç Maddeleri Sanayi Ticaret v EUIPO — Yadex International (pinar KURUYEMIŞ) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark pinar KURUYEMIȘ — Earlier German word mark PINAR — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Right to be heard — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Suspension of proceedings — Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dried product, fruit, preserved product, processed food product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable








C_2023216EN.01004501.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/45






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Pinar Kuruyemiş Gida Ve Ihtiyaç Maddeleri Sanayi Ticaret v EUIPO — Yadex International (pinar KURUYEMIŞ)
(Case T-147/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark pinar KURUYEMIȘ - Earlier German word mark PINAR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Suspension of proceedings - Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
(2023/C 216/59)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Pinar Kuruyemiş Gida Ve Ihtiyaç Maddeleri Sanayi Ticaret AŞ (Karatay, Konya, Türkiye) (represented by: M.E. López Camba and A.M. Lyubomirova Geleva, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: T. Klee, M. Eberl and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Yadex International GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: P. Kohl, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 12 January 2022 (Case R 1148/2021-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Pinar Kuruyemiş Gida Ve Ihtiyaç Maddeleri Sanayi Ticaret AŞ to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Yadex International GmbH for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.






(1)  OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.
Case T-20/18: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — CV v Commission (Civil service — Officials — Social security — Article 73 of the Staff Regulations — Common rules on the insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease — Occupational disease — Medical Committee — Article 22 — Refusal to recognise the occupational nature of a disease — Proper conduct of the pre-litigation procedure — Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European official, damages, medical report, occupational disease, staff regulations (EU)








C_2023216EN.01003801.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/38






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — CV v Commission
(Case T-20/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Social security - Article 73 of the Staff Regulations - Common rules on the insurance against the risk of accident and of occupational disease - Occupational disease - Medical Committee - Article 22 - Refusal to recognise the occupational nature of a disease - Proper conduct of the pre-litigation procedure - Obligation to state reasons)
(2023/C 216/48)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: CV (represented by: F. Moyse and L. Heisten, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T.S. Bohr and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, the annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 March 2017 rejecting his application for recognition of the occupational origin of his disease and the decision of the Commission of 15 March 2017 imposing on the applicant certain costs and fees of the members of the Medical Committee that ruled on that application and, secondly, compensation for the material and non-material damage which the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders CV to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 112, 26.3.2018.
Case T-220/23: Action brought on 26 April 2023 — Casal sport v EUIPO — Tennis d’Aquitaine (CITY STADE)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building, registered trade mark, sports facilities, trade-mark law








C_2023223EN.01003501.xml










26.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 223/35






Action brought on 26 April 2023 — Casal sport v EUIPO — Tennis d’Aquitaine (CITY STADE)
(Case T-220/23)
(2023/C 223/47)
Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties


Applicant: Sports et loisirs (Casal sport) (Altorf, France) (represented by: C. Pecnard, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tennis d’Aquitaine SAS (Ambares, 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: EU figurative mark CITY STADE in red and white colours — EU trade mark No 11 945 581.

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 February 2023 in case R 179/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and order the revocation of the EU trade mark CITY STADE No 11 945 581 in respect of all products;










—


in the alternative, after annulment of the contested decision, remit the case to the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










—


order the proprietor to pay the costs of this action, including the costs incurred in the proceedings before EUIPO.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 58(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-153/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Volkswagen v EUIPO — XTG (XTG) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark XTG — Earlier EU word mark GTX — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer equipment, electricity storage device, electronic device, mobile communication, mobile phone, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2023216EN.01004601.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/46






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Volkswagen v EUIPO — XTG (XTG)
(Case T-153/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark XTG - Earlier EU word mark GTX - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2023/C 216/61)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: S. Machei and G. Orsoni, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: XTG S.A. (Wrocław, Poland)

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 20 December 2021 (Case R 1387/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Volkswagen AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.
Case T-35/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Kaminski v EUIPO — Polfarmex (SYRENA) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark SYRENA — Application of the law ratione temporis — Partial inadmissibility of the action — Res judicata — Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use in the European Union — Obligation to state reasons — First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, motor vehicle insurance, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2023216EN.01004401.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/44






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Kaminski v EUIPO — Polfarmex (SYRENA)
(Case T-35/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark SYRENA - Application of the law ratione temporis - Partial inadmissibility of the action - Res judicata - Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Genuine use in the European Union - Obligation to state reasons - First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2023/C 216/58)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Arkadiusz Kaminski (Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada) (represented by: W. Trybowski, E. Pijewska and M. Mazurek, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Polfarmex S.A. (Kutno, Poland)

Re:

By his action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, principally, alteration of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 October 2021 (Joined Cases R 1952/2020-1 and R 1953/2020-1) and, in the alternative, partial annulment of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Arkadiusz Kaminski to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 119, 14.3.2022.
Case C-266/23, Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 26 April 2023 — A. S.A. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: distribution cost, electrical energy, energy distribution, excise duty, price of energy, purchase price, tax exemption








C_2023278EN.01001601.xml










7.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 278/16






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 26 April 2023 — A. S.A. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy
(Case C-266/23, Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy)
(2023/C 278/24)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: A. S.A.

Respondent: Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy

Questions referred







1.


Can Article 17(1)(a) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (1) be understood as meaning that only the purchase price of the electricity itself, to the exclusion of any additional charges, for example a distribution charge, which must be borne under the legislation in force in a Member State in order to purchase electricity, must be included in the actual cost of the energy purchased?










2.


Must Article 17(1)(a) of Directive 2003/96 be interpreted as precluding the exclusion of an exemption from excise duty on the purchase of electricity for an energy-intensive business [Article 31d(1) of the Ustawa z 6 grudnia 2008 r. o podatku akcyzowym (Law of 6 December 2008 on excise duty (Dz. U. of 2022, item 143)] in the event that that business benefits from an object-specific exemption from excise duty under national legislation (Article 30(7a) of the Law on excise duty), when that business demonstrates that, in relation to the same energy, it does not benefit from those two exemptions simultaneously, and assuming that the total amount of the exemptions does not exceed the amount of excise duty paid for the same period of time?






(1)  OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11091 – PLATINUM EQUITY GROUP / DIVERSEY HOLDINGS) Candidate case for simplified procedure (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 143/04
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: cosmetic product, economic concentration, investment company, merger control, polishing and scouring preparations, public hygiene, toiletries








C_2023143EN.01000401.xml










26.4.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 143/4






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11091 – PLATINUM EQUITY GROUP / DIVERSEY HOLDINGS)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 143/04)

1.   
On 18 April 2023, 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:






—


Platinum Equity Group, LLC (‘Platinum Equity Group’, USA),










—


Diversey Holdings Ltd. (‘Diversey’, USA).




Platinum Equity Group will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of Diversey.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


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






—


Platinum Equity Group specializes in the acquisition and operation of companies that provide services and solutions to customers in a broad range of business sectors, including information technology, telecommunications, logistics, metal services, manufacturing and distribution,










—


Diversey is a manufacturer and supplier of a product portfolio of hygiene, infection prevention and cleaning solutions, combining patented chemicals, dosing and dispensing equipment, cleaning machines and services, and ancillary digital analyses.






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.
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.


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.11091 – PLATINUM EQUITY GROUP / DIVERSEY HOLDINGS
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
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-154/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Volkswagen v EUIPO — XTG (XTG) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark XTG — Earlier EU word mark GTX — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, computer equipment, electricity storage device, electronic device, mobile communication, mobile phone, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law, wholesale trade








C_2023216EN.01004701.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/47






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Volkswagen v EUIPO — XTG (XTG)
(Case T-154/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark XTG - Earlier EU word mark GTX - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2023/C 216/62)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany) (represented by: S. Machei and G. Orsoni, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: XTG S.A. (Wrocław, Poland)

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 20 December 2021 (Case R 1385/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Volkswagen AG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 198, 16.5.2022.