do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-273/23, Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni and Others: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 26 April 2023 — Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni and Others v Telecom Italia SpA and Others
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competition, competition law, equal treatment, mobile communication, principle of proportionality, regulation of telecommunications, universal service








C_2023252EN.01003201.xml










17.7.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 252/32






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 26 April 2023 — Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni and Others v Telecom Italia SpA and Others
(Case C-273/23, Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni and Others)
(2023/C 252/35)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni, Ministero dello Sviluppo economico, Telecom Italia SpA

Respondents: Telecom Italia SpA, Vodafone Italia SpA, Fastweb SpA, Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni, Tiscali Italia SpA, BT Italia SpA

Question referred

Must Directive 97/33/EC, (1) and in particular Article 5 thereof, and Directive 2002/22/EC, (2) and in particular Article 13 thereof, applicable ratione temporis, and the principles of transparency, least market distortion, non-discrimination and proportionality, be interpreted as meaning that:






(a)


it is permissible for national legislation to impose by law the extension to mobile telephone operators of obligations to contribute to the financing of unfair burdens arising from the provision of the same universal service, without making such cases subject to verification by the NRA that there is a competitive relationship or substitutability between the contributing operators and the designated operator for the provision of that service within the same relevant market under competition law;










(b)


NRAs are permitted, in addition to or as an alternative to the criterion of substitutability between fixed and mobile network services, for the purposes of verifying the unfair nature of the burden, to use other criteria — and if so, which ones — to establish a financing obligation on mobile operators?






(1)  Directive 97/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 on interconnection in Telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service and interoperability through application of the principles of Open Network Provision (ONP) (OJ 1997 L 199, p. 32).

(2)  Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 51).
Case T-549/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark ROCHEM — 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.01004201.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/42






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)
(Case T-549/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark ROCHEM - 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 216/54)
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 and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

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 1547/2019-1).

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.
Case T-757/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Activa — Grillküche v EUIPO — Targa (Apparatus for grilling) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing apparatus for grilling — Disclosure of the earlier design — Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, household article








C_2023216EN.01004301.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/43






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Activa — Grillküche v EUIPO — Targa (Apparatus for grilling)
(Case T-757/21) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing apparatus for grilling - Disclosure of the earlier design - Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
(2023/C 216/56)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Activa — Grillküche GmbH (Selb, Germany) (represented by: F. Stangl and M. Würth, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Sakalaitė-Orlovskienė and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Targa GmbH (Soest, Germany) (represented by: M.-H. Hoffmann, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 October 2021 (Case R 1651/2020-3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Activa — Grillküche GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.
Case T-794/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Wenz Kunststoff v EUIPO — Mouldpro (MOULDPRO) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU word mark MOULDPRO — Genuine use of the mark — Nature of use — Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark is registered — Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, plastics industry, registered trade mark, rubber industry, trade-mark law








C_2023216EN.01004302.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/43






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Wenz Kunststoff v EUIPO — Mouldpro (MOULDPRO)
(Case T-794/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark MOULDPRO - Genuine use of the mark - Nature of use - Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark is registered - Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Legitimate expectations)
(2023/C 216/57)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Wenz Kunststoff GmbH & Co. KG (Lüdenscheid, Germany) (represented by: J. Bühling and D. Graetsch, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mouldpro ApS (Ballerup, Denmark) (represented by: W. Rebernik, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 October 2021 (Case R 646/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Wenz Kunststoff GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 73, 14.2.2022.
Case T-548/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark ROCHEM — 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.01004101.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/41






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — Rochem Group v EUIPO — Rochem Marine (ROCHEM)
(Case T-548/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark ROCHEM - 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 216/53)
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 1546/2019-1).

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.
Case T-148/22: 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.01004502.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-148/22) (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 216/60)
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 1149/2021-1).

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–54/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — OHB System v Commission (Public supply contracts — Tendering procedure — Competitive dialogue — Procurement of Galileo transition satellites — Rejection of a tenderer’s tender — Exclusion criteria — Serious professional misconduct on the part of a tenderer — No final judgment or final administrative decision — Referral to the panel referred to in Article 143 of the Financial Regulation — Equal treatment — Abnormally low tender — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, public procurement, satellite, satellite navigation, supplies contract, tendering








C_2023216EN.01003901.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/39






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — OHB System v Commission
(Case T–54/21) (1)

(Public supply contracts - Tendering procedure - Competitive dialogue - Procurement of Galileo transition satellites - Rejection of a tenderer’s tender - Exclusion criteria - Serious professional misconduct on the part of a tenderer - No final judgment or final administrative decision - Referral to the panel referred to in Article 143 of the Financial Regulation - Equal treatment - Abnormally low tender - Manifest error of assessment)
(2023/C 216/50)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: OHB System AG (Bremen, Germany) (represented by: W. Würfel and F. Hausmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Wilms, L. André, J. Estrada de Solà and L. Mantl, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by P. Gentili and G. Santini, avvocati dello stato) and Airbus Defence and Space GmbH (Taufkirchen, Germany) (represented by: P.-E. Partsch, F. Dewald and C.-E. Seestädt, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decisions of the European Commission, communicated to the applicant by letter of 19 January 2021 and by fax of 22 January 2021, not to accept its tender, submitted in the context of Call for Tenders in the form of a competitive dialogue 2018/S 091-206089 relating to the procurement of Galileo transition satellites, and to award the contract to two other tenderers.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders OHB System AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief;










3.


Orders the Italian Republic and Airbus Defence and Space GmbH to bear their own costs.






(1)  OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.
Case T-547/21: 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 word 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.01004002.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-547/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word 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 216/52)
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 1545/2019-1).

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.
Case T-557/20: Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — SRB v EDPS (Protection of personal data — Procedure for granting compensation to shareholders and creditors following the resolution of a bank — Decision of the EDPS in which it found that the SRB failed to fulfil its obligations concerning the processing of personal data — Article 15(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 — Concept of personal data — Article 3(1) of Regulation 2018/1725 — Right of access to the file)
Date: 2023-04-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, access to information, bank resolution, data protection, data-processing law, indemnification, personal data








C_2023216EN.01003802.xml










19.6.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 216/38






Judgment of the General Court of 26 April 2023 — SRB v EDPS
(Case T-557/20) (1)

(Protection of personal data - Procedure for granting compensation to shareholders and creditors following the resolution of a bank - Decision of the EDPS in which it found that the SRB failed to fulfil its obligations concerning the processing of personal data - Article 15(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 - Concept of personal data - Article 3(1) of Regulation 2018/1725 - Right of access to the file)
(2023/C 216/49)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Single Resolution Board (represented by: H. Ehlers, M. Fernández Rupérez, A. Lapresta Bienz, acting as Agents, and by H.-G. Kamann, M. Braun, F. Louis, and L. Hesse, lawyers)

Defendant: European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) (represented by: P. Candellier, X. Lareo and T. Zerdick, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the Single Resolution Board (SRB) seeks, first, annulment of the revised decision of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) of 24 November 2020 adopted following the SRB’s request for review of the decision of the EDPS of 24 June 2020 concerning five complaints submitted by several complainants (Cases 2019-947, 2019-998, 2019-999, 2019-1000 and 2019-1122) and, second, a declaration that the decision of the EDPS of 24 June 2020 is illegal.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the revised decision of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) of 24 November 2020 adopted following the request from the Single Resolution Board (SRB) for review of the decision of the EDPS of 24 June 2020 concerning five complaints submitted by several complainants (Cases 2019-947, 2019-998, 2019-999, 2019-1000 and 2019-1122);










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders the EDPS to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 390, 16.11.2020.