do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-591/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Apart v EUIPO — S. Tous (Representation of the outline of a bear) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark representing the outline of a bear — Absolute ground for invalidity — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202300130EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/130


16.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Apart v EUIPO — S. Tous (Representation of the outline of a bear)
(Case T-591/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark representing the outline of a bear - Absolute ground for invalidity - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2023/130)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Apart sp. z o.o. (Suchy Las, Poland) (represented by: J. Gwiazdowska, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: S. Tous, SL (Manresa, Spain) (represented by: D. Gómez Sánchez, J.L. Gracia Albero and M. Schaaf, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 July 2021 (Case R 222/2020-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Apart sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 462, 15.11.2021.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/130/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-434/23: Action brought on 26 July 2023 — Essity Hygiene and Health AB v EUIPO (Representation of a leaf)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, packaging product, pulp and paper industry, registered trade mark, toiletries, trade-mark law








C_2023314EN.01002502.xml










4.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 314/25






Action brought on 26 July 2023 — Essity Hygiene and Health AB v EUIPO (Representation of a leaf)
(Case T-434/23)
(2023/C 314/31)
Language of the case: Swedish

Parties


Applicant: Essity Hygiene and Health AB (Gothenburg, Sweden) (represented by: U. Wennermark, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Trade mark at issue: Application for registration of an EU figurative mark (Representation of a leaf) — Application No 16 709 305

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 May 2023 in Case R 2196/2017-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims primarily that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision in so far as the appeal is dismissed (point two of the operative part of the decision);










—


amend the contested decision by granting the appeal against the examiner’s decision for goods in Class 16 covered by the application;










—


order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs incurred before EUIPO and before the Court.




The applicant claims in the alternative that the Court should:






—


order EUIPO to bear its own legal costs and, in addition, pay the applicant’s costs incurred before the Court.




The applicant claims in the further alternative that the Court should:






—


order EUIPO to pay its costs incurred before the Court.





Pleas in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case T-273/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica v Commission (Arbitration clause — ‘Horizon 2020 — Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) — ‘Detecting and ANalysing TErrorist-related online contents and financing activities — DANTE’ project — Grant agreement — Action for annulment — Final audit report — Debit note — Acts not amenable to review — Acts forming part of a purely contractual context from which they are not separable — Inadmissibility — Staff costs — Bonuses calculated on the basis of commercial targets — Ineligibility — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU aid, Framework Programme for Research and Development, audit, bonus payment, eligibility criteria, financial aid, reimbursement of aid, terrorism, wage cost








C_202300135EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/135


16.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica v Commission
(Case T-273/22) (1)

(Arbitration clause - ‘Horizon 2020 — Framework Programme for Research and Innovation’ (2014-2020) - ‘Detecting and ANalysing TErrorist-related online contents and financing activities — DANTE’ project - Grant agreement - Action for annulment - Final audit report - Debit note - Acts not amenable to review - Acts forming part of a purely contractual context from which they are not separable - Inadmissibility - Staff costs - Bonuses calculated on the basis of commercial targets - Ineligibility - Legitimate expectations)
(C/2023/135)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: S. Villata, L. Montevecchi and C. Oncia, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Ilkova and S. Romoli, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Articles 263 and 272 TFEU the applicant seeks, in essence, first, annulment of several acts of the European Commission relating to the implementation of grant agreement No 700367 concerning the project entitled ‘Detecting and ANalysing TErrorist-related online contents and financing activities — DANTE’ and, second, a finding that certain costs are eligible for financing on the basis of that agreement and, accordingly, that the Commission does not have the right to pursue the reimbursement of the sums corresponding to those costs.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 276, 18.7.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/135/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-663/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Mood Media Netherlands v EUIPO — Tailoradio (RADIO MOOD In-store Radio, made easy) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark RADIO MOOD In-store Radio, made easy — Earlier EU figurative mark MOOD:MIX — 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: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, business administration, business management, consumer information, product design, product quality, registered trade mark, sale, trade-mark law








C_2023338EN.01002202.xml










25.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/22






Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Mood Media Netherlands v EUIPO — Tailoradio (RADIO MOOD In-store Radio, made easy)
(Case T-663/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark RADIO MOOD In-store Radio, made easy - Earlier EU figurative mark MOOD:MIX - 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 338/29)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Mood Media Netherlands BV (Naarden, Netherlands) (represented by: A. M. Pecoraro, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Tailoradio Srl (Milan, Italy) (represented by A. Sobol and S. Bernardini, lawyers)

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 23 August 2022 (Case R 1853/2018-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mood Media Netherlands BV to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Tailoradio Srl in the proceedings before the General Court;










3.


Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 7, 9.1.2023.
Case T-215/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — SMA Mineral v Commission (Environment — Directive 2003/87/EC — System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances — Installation using an intermediate product covered by a product benchmark — Rejection of data relating to the free allocation of allowances concerning that installation — Manifest errors of assessment)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU Emissions Trading Scheme, EU emission allowance, greenhouse gas, industrial pollution, intermediate goods, reduction of gas emissions, tradeable emission permit








C_2023338EN.01001701.xml










25.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/17






Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — SMA Mineral v Commission
(Case T-215/21) (1)

(Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - System for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading - Transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances - Installation using an intermediate product covered by a product benchmark - Rejection of data relating to the free allocation of allowances concerning that installation - Manifest errors of assessment)
(2023/C 338/21)
Language of the case: Swedish

Parties


Applicant: SMA Mineral AB (Filipstad, Sweden) (represented by: E. Larsson, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Wils, B. De Meester and P. Carlin, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Article 1(2) of Commission Decision (EU) 2021/355 of 25 February 2021 concerning national implementation measures for the transitional free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances in accordance with Article 11(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2021 L 68, p. 221).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 297, 26.7.2021.
Case C-483/23, T Trust: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 26 July 2023 — A and Others v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze and Others
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, freezing of assets, international sanctions, trust company








C_202300502EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/502


6.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 26 July 2023 — A and Others v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze and Others
(Case C-483/23, T Trust)
(C/2023/502)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: A, B, C, D, T

Defendants: Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Comitato di Sicurezza Finanziaria, Agenzia del Demanio

Questions referred







1.


Should Article 2(1) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (1) be interpreted as meaning that the freezing measure may also be taken in the event of the transfer of assets or resources to a trust by the settlor indicated in Annex I to the Regulation (designated or listed person), who is to be regarded as the party to whom the asset or those resources belong?










2.


In the event of a negative reply: should] Article 2(1) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 be interpreted as meaning that the freezing measure may also be taken in the event of the transfer of assets or resources to a trust by the settlor indicated in Annex I to the Regulation (designated or listed person), who is to be regarded as the party associated with the person to whom the asset or resources belong?










3.


In the event of a negative reply: should] Article 2(1) of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 be interpreted as meaning that the freezing measure may also be taken in the event of the transfer of assets or resources to a trust by the settlor indicated in Annex I to the Regulation (designated or listed person), who is to be regarded as the party who controls the asset or the resources?






(1)  Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2014 L 78, p. 6).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/502/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-222/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica v Commission and REA (Arbitration clause — ‘Horizon 2020’ Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) — ‘aDvanced sOcial enGineering And vulNerability Assessment Framework (Dogana)’ project — Grant agreement — Action for annulment — Final audit report — Debit note — Acts not open to challenge — Acts forming part of a purely contractual context from which they are not separable — Inadmissibility — Identification of the defendant — Lack of jurisdiction — Personnel costs — Bonuses calculated on the basis of commercial targets — Ineligibility — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Framework Programme for Research and Development, admissibility, audit, debt, eligibility criteria, research and development








C_202300134EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/134


16.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica v Commission and REA
(Case T-222/22) (1)

(Arbitration clause - ‘Horizon 2020’ Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) - ‘aDvanced sOcial enGineering And vulNerability Assessment Framework (Dogana)’ project - Grant agreement - Action for annulment - Final audit report - Debit note - Acts not open to challenge - Acts forming part of a purely contractual context from which they are not separable - Inadmissibility - Identification of the defendant - Lack of jurisdiction - Personnel costs - Bonuses calculated on the basis of commercial targets - Ineligibility - Legitimate expectations)
(C/2023/134)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica SpA (Rome, Italy) (represented by: S. Villata, L. Montevecchi and C. Oncia, lawyers)

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: M. Ilkova and S. Romoli, acting as Agents), European Research Executive Agency (represented by S. Payan-Lagrou and V. Canetti, acting as Agents, and by D. Gullo, lawyer)

Re:

By its action based on Articles 263 and 272 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, first, the annulment of a number of acts of the European Commission and of the European Research Executive Agency (REA) concerning the implementation of grant agreement 653618, relating to the project entitled ‘aDvanced sOcial enGineering And vulNerability Assessment Framework (Dogana)’ (‘the project’) and, second, a declaration that certain costs are eligible for financing under that agreement and, accordingly, that the Commission and the REA are not entitled to seek reimbursement of the sums corresponding to those costs.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action.










2.


Orders Engineering — Ingegneria Informatica SpA to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 237, 20.6.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/134/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-481/23, Sangas: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Nacional (Spain) lodged on 26 July 2023 — Criminal proceedings against JMTB
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European arrest warrant, barring of penalties by limitation, enforcement of ruling, imprisonment, residence








C_202301279EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/1279


11.12.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Nacional (Spain) lodged on 26 July 2023 — Criminal proceedings against JMTB
(Case C-481/23, Sangas) (1)

(C/2023/1279)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Nacional

Criminal proceedings against:

JMTB

Other parties: Ministerio Fiscal; Abogacia del Estado

Questions referred







1.


Since Article 4(6) of the Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (2002/584/JHA) (2) provides that the grounds for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant include cases in which the European arrest warrant has been issued for the purposes of execution of a custodial sentence or detention order, where the requested person is staying in, or is a national or a resident of the executing Member State and that State undertakes to execute the sentence or detention order in accordance with its domestic law:






a)


Is it permissible to extend the application of that optional ground for refusal to surrender to cases in which a final decision has not yet been reached regarding the requested person?










b)


If that possibility were allowed, is it possible to refuse to surrender on the ground that the requested person is resident in the State in which enforcement is sought, without that State undertaking to execute the sentence or detention order in accordance with its domestic law?














2.


Since Article 4(4) of Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (2002/584/JHA) provides that the grounds for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant include cases where the criminal prosecution or punishment of the requested person is statute-barred according to the law of the executing Member State and the acts fall within the jurisdiction of that Member State under its own criminal law, is it permissible to extend that ground for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant to cases in which the offence or penalty is regarded as statute-barred under the law of the executing Member State, even if the courts of that State do not have jurisdiction to determine the facts?






(1)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

(2)  
            OJ 2002 L 190, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1279/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-745/21: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien v EUIPO — Cantina San Donaci (Passo Lungo) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Passo Lungo — Earlier national word mark Doppio Passo — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202300132EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/132


16.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien v EUIPO — Cantina San Donaci (Passo Lungo)
(Case T-745/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Passo Lungo - Earlier national word mark Doppio Passo - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(C/2023/132)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH (Freyburg, Germany) (represented by: K. Schmidt-Hern and A. Lubberger, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Cantina Sociale Cooperativa San Donaci (San Donaci, Italy)

Re:

By its 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 20 September 2021 (Case R 130/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Rotkäppchen-Mumm Sektkellereien GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/132/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-434/22: Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Topas v EUIPO — Tarczyński (VEGE STORY) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark VEGE STORY — Earlier EU word mark végé’ — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, confectionery product, eating habits, food fat, food substitute, prepared foodstuff, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable product








C_2023338EN.01002201.xml










25.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/22






Judgment of the General Court of 26 July 2023 — Topas v EUIPO — Tarczyński (VEGE STORY)
(Case T-434/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark VEGE STORY - Earlier EU word mark végé’ - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(2023/C 338/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Topas GmbH (Mössingen, Germany) (represented by: S. Hofmann and W. Göpfert, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Tarczyński S.A. (Trzebnica, Poland) (represented by: E. Gryc-Zerych, 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 10 May 2022 (Case R 1977/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Topas GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Tarczyński S.A.;










3.


Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 326, 29.8.2022.