do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-462/23: Action brought on 7 August 2023 — ePlus v EUIPO — Telefónica Germany (E-Plus)
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2023338EN.01003201.xml










25.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/32






Action brought on 7 August 2023 — ePlus v EUIPO — Telefónica Germany (E-Plus)
(Case T-462/23)
(2023/C 338/42)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: ePlus Inc. (Herndon, Virginia, United States) (represented by: A. Mottet, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Telefónica Germany GmbH & Co. OHG (Munich, Germany)

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 word mark E-Plus — European Union trade mark No 17 698 846

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2023 in Case R 1463/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant, including those incurred for the purposes of the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










—


order any intervener to bear its own costs.





Pleas in law







—


Insufficient assessment of genuine use and implications for bad faith assessment;










—


Misinterpretation of evidence pertaining to cessation of use;










—


Disregard for proprietor’s discontinuation of use and implication for bad faith assessment.
Euro exchange rates (Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.) 4 August 2023 2023/C 277/01
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2023277EN.01000101.xml










7.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 277/1






Euro exchange rates (1)

4 August 2023
(2023/C 277/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0946 




JPY


Japanese yen


156,11 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4514 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,86193 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,7000 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9598 




ISK


Iceland króna


144,90 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,1858 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,260 




HUF


Hungarian forint


391,73 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,4485 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9530 




TRY


Turkish lira


29,5436 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6694 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4648 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,5485 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,8009 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4701 




KRW


South Korean won


1 435,40 




ZAR


South African rand


20,4214 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8661 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 624,59 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9859 




PHP


Philippine peso


61,073 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


38,081 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,3729 




MXN


Mexican peso


18,9566 




INR


Indian rupee


90,7300 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-463/23: Action brought on 7 August 2023 — ePlus v EUIPO — Telefónica Germany (E-Plus)
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, building industry, business management, financial services, registered trade mark, scientific research, service, telecommunications, tourism, trade-mark law








C_2023338EN.01003301.xml










25.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 338/33






Action brought on 7 August 2023 — ePlus v EUIPO — Telefónica Germany (E-Plus)
(Case T-463/23)
(2023/C 338/43)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: ePlus Inc. (Herndon, Virginia, United States) (represented by: A. Mottet, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Telefónica Germany GmbH & Co. OHG (Munich, Germany)

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 word mark E-Plus — European Union trade mark No 17 781 791

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 June 2023 in Case R 951/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant, including those incurred for the purposes of the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO;










—


order any intervener to bear its own costs.





Pleas in law







—


Insufficient assessment of genuine use and implications for bad faith assessment;










—


Misinterpretation of evidence pertaining to cessation of use;










—


Disregard for proprietor’s discontinuation of use and implication for bad faith assessment.
Case T-470/23: Action brought on 7 August 2023 — Erzeugergemeinschaft Winzersekt v EUIPO — Milz (Hinterland)
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, liqueur, registered trade mark, spirits, trade-mark law








C_2023329EN.01003702.xml










18.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/37






Action brought on 7 August 2023 — Erzeugergemeinschaft Winzersekt v EUIPO — Milz (Hinterland)
(Case T-470/23)
(2023/C 329/55)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Erzeugergemeinschaft Winzersekt GmbH (Sprendlingen, Germany) (represented by: C. Düchs, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Martin Milz (Hergensweiler, Germany)

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 word mark Hinterland — EU trade mark No 18 121 682

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 June 2023 in Case R 2413/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


uphold the decision of the Cancellation Division (No 52 519 C) of 27 October 2022 declaring EU trade mark No 18 121 682 invalid in its entirety;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings before the General Court and the other party to pay the costs of the cancellation and appeal proceedings before EUIPO.





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;










—


Infringement of Article 7(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Case C-501/23, Finanzamt Wilmersdorf: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2023 — DL v Land Berlin
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: economic activity, establishment, financial solvency, jurisdiction, residence








C_202300954EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/954


27.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2023 — DL v Land Berlin
(Case C-501/23, Finanzamt Wilmersdorf)
(C/2023/954)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Debtor and appellant: DL

Creditor and respondent: Land Berlin

Questions referred







1.


Is the first sentence of the third subparagraph of Article 3(1) in conjunction with Article 2(10) of Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (‘the European Insolvency Regulation’) (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the place of operations of an individual exercising an independent business or professional activity constitutes an establishment even if the operations are carried out without any human means or assets?










2.


Question 1 is answered in the negative: Is the first sentence of the third subparagraph of Article 3(1) of the European Insolvency Regulation to be interpreted as meaning that, if an individual exercising an independent business or professional activity does not maintain an establishment within the meaning of Article 2(10) of the European Insolvency Regulation, the centre of main interests is presumed to be the place where the independent business or professional activity is exercised in the absence of proof to the contrary?










3.


If Question 2 is answered in the negative: Is Article 3(1) of the European Insolvency Regulation to be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of an individual exercising an independent business or professional activity who does not maintain an establishment within the meaning of Article 2(10) of the European Insolvency Regulation, the centre of main interests is presumed to be the place of the individual’s habitual residence pursuant to the first sentence of the fourth subparagraph of Article 3(1) of the European Insolvency Regulation, in the absence of proof to the contrary?






(1)  
            OJ 2015 L 141, p. 19.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/954/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-471/23: Action brought on 7 August 2023 — Lidl Digital International v EUIPO — Ningbo Hanyuan Lighting (Lamps)
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, lighting equipment








C_2023329EN.01003801.xml










18.9.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 329/38






Action brought on 7 August 2023 — Lidl Digital International v EUIPO — Ningbo Hanyuan Lighting (Lamps)
(Case T-471/23)
(2023/C 329/56)
Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties


Applicant: Lidl Digital International GmbH & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany) (represented by: T. Dolde and C. Zimmer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ningbo Hanyuan Lighting Co. Ltd (Ningbo, China)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Design at issue: Community design (Lamps) — Community design No 5647708-0010

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 June 2023 in Case R 598/2022-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs of these proceedings and the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 7(1), in conjunction with Article 65(1)(c), of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.
Case C-502/23, Iberia: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2023 — MC v Iberia, Líneas Aéreas de España, SA Operadora Unipersonal
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: air transport, carriage of passengers, carrier, consumer protection, passenger rights, payment, ticket








C_202300639EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/639


13.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2023 — MC v Iberia, Líneas Aéreas de España, SA Operadora Unipersonal
(Case C-502/23, Iberia)
(C/2023/639)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: MC

Defendant: Iberia, Líneas Aéreas de España, SA Operadora Unipersonal

Questions referred







1.


Must Article 5(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(a) and Article 7(3) of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation (1) be interpreted as meaning that a passenger who bought a ticket for a flight by an operating air carrier not with money but using bonus miles under a frequent flyer programme established by another air carrier may claim reimbursement of the ticket price in money if that flight is cancelled by the operating air carrier?










2.


If the first question is answered in the affirmative: Is the ticket price for the purposes of Article 8(1)(a) of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation, reimbursement of which the passenger may claim in money, to be determined in such cases on the basis of the publicly available fare at which the cancelled flight in question is offered for sale by the operating air carrier or on the basis of the (average) value of the bonus miles used?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/639/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-504/23 P: Appeal brought on 07 August 2023 by Brooks England Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 07 June 2023 in Case T-63/22, Brooks England Ltd v EUIPO — Brooks Sports, Inc.
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile product, trade-mark law








C_202301282EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/1282


11.12.2023





Appeal brought on 07 August 2023 by Brooks England Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 07 June 2023 in Case T-63/22, Brooks England Ltd v EUIPO — Brooks Sports, Inc.
(Case C-504/23 P)
(C/2023/1282)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Brooks England Ltd (represented by: S. A. Feltrinelli, avvocato)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), Brooks Sports, Inc.
By order of 27 October 2023, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Brooks England Ltd should bear its own costs.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/1282/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Initiation of proceedings (Case M.11033 – ADOBE / FIGMA) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 282/01
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, information technology industry, merger control, product design








C_2023282EN.01000101.xml










11.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/1






Initiation of proceedings
(Case M.11033 – ADOBE / FIGMA)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 282/01)
On 7 August 2023, the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the above-mentioned case after finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regard to the notified concentration, and is without prejudice to the final decision on the case. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concentration to the Commission.
In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not later than 15 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.11033 – ADOBE / FIGMA, to the following 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’).
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11180 – PRADA / ZEGNA / FEDELI) (Text with EEA relevance) 2023/C 282/02
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: beverage, cosmetic product, economic concentration, foodstuff, footwear industry, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, leather, luxury products industry, merger control, textile industry








C_2023282EN.01000201.xml










11.8.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 282/2






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11180 – PRADA / ZEGNA / FEDELI)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2023/C 282/02)
On 7 August 2023, 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) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in Italian language 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 32023M11180. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
Case T-472/23: Action brought on 7 August 2023 — Małgorzata Marcinkowska-Dec v EUIPO — Ismailova (DESSI)
Date: 2023-08-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, advertising, cosmetic product, electronic commerce, hairdressing and beauty care, registered trade mark, retail trade, trade-mark law








C_202300030EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/30


9.10.2023





Action brought on 7 August 2023 — Małgorzata Marcinkowska-Dec v EUIPO — Ismailova (DESSI)
(Case T-472/23)
(C/2023/30)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Małgorzata Marcinkowska-Dec (Kraków, Poland) (represented by: A. Witońska-Pakulska, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aza Ismailova (Herselt, Belgium)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark DESSI — European Union trade mark No 18 116 969

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 March 2023 in Case R 1738/2022-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/30/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)