do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-108/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Sopra Steria Benelux and Unisys Belgium v Commission (Public service contracts — Tendering procedure — Services for the specification, development, maintenance and support of IT platforms for the Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union — Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of a previous decision — Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer and award of the contract to the tenderer whose tender had initially been accepted — Execution of a judgment of the General Court — Article 266 TFEU — Manifest error of assessment)
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, consortium, enforcement of ruling, information technology, invitation to tender, public procurement, services contract








C_202300317EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/317


30.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Sopra Steria Benelux and Unisys Belgium v Commission
(Case T-108/22) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Services for the specification, development, maintenance and support of IT platforms for the Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union - Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of a previous decision - Rejection of the tender submitted by a tenderer and award of the contract to the tenderer whose tender had initially been accepted - Execution of a judgment of the General Court - Article 266 TFEU - Manifest error of assessment)
(C/2023/317)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicants: Sopra Steria Benelux (Brussels, Belgium), Unisys Belgium (Machelen, Belgium) (represented by: L. Masson and G. Tilman, lawyers)

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

Re:

By their action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek the annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 20 December 2021, by which that institution did not accept the joint tender they had submitted for Lot A in the tendering procedure bearing reference TAXUD/2019/OP/0006 concerning services for the specification, development, maintenance and support of IT platforms for DG Taxation and Customs Union and awarded the contract pertaining to that lot to the consortium whose tender had initially been accepted.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sopra Steria Benelux and Unisys Belgium to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 191, 10.5.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/317/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-45/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Weider Germany v EUIPO — Den i Nosht (YIPPIE!) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark YIPPIE! — Earlier EU word mark Yuppie — Relative ground for invalidity — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 57(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cereal product, confectionery, confectionery product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202300521EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/521


6.11.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Weider Germany v EUIPO — Den i Nosht (YIPPIE!)
(Case T-45/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark YIPPIE! - Earlier EU word mark Yuppie - Relative ground for invalidity - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 57(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(C/2023/521)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Weider Germany GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: T. Pfeifer and N. Böhmer, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Den i Nosht OOD (Gorna Oryahovitsa, Bulgaria) (represented by: I. Pakidanska, lawyer)

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 12 November 2021 (Case R 2227/2020-1)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Weider Germany GmbH to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 109, 7.3.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/521/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-212/20: Order of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Gaz-System v ACER (Action for annulment — Energy — Regulation (EU) 2017/459 — Capacity allocation mechanisms in gas transmission systems — Selection of gas transmission capacity booking platforms — ACER decision in the absence of agreement between the national regulatory authorities — Selection procedure by ACER — Conditions for ACER to resume the proceedings after referral back by the Board of Appeal — Scope and intensity of the Board of Appeal’s review of the legality of ACER decisions — Manifestly well-founded action)
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: energy transport, equal treatment, gas industry, gas pipeline, gas supply, right to justice, transparency in decision-making








C_202400551EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/551


8.1.2024





Order of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Gaz-System v ACER
(Case T-212/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Energy - Regulation (EU) 2017/459 - Capacity allocation mechanisms in gas transmission systems - Selection of gas transmission capacity booking platforms - ACER decision in the absence of agreement between the national regulatory authorities - Selection procedure by ACER - Conditions for ACER to resume the proceedings after referral back by the Board of Appeal - Scope and intensity of the Board of Appeal’s review of the legality of ACER decisions - Manifestly well-founded action)
(C/2024/551)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Operator Gazociągów Przesylowych Gaz-System S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: E. Buczkowska and M. Trepka, lawyers,)

Defendant: European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER), (represented by: P. Martinet and S. Vaona, acting as Agents, and by E. Ameye, M. Sousa Ferro and E. Abril Fernández, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant asks the General Court to annul Decision No A-006-2019 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) (‘the Board of Appeal’) of 7 February 2020.

Operative part of the order







1.


Decision No A-006-2019 of the Board of Appeal of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) of 7 February 2020 is annulled.










2.


ACER is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/551/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-291/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Pumpyanskiy v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine — Freezing of funds — Inclusion of the applicant's name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned — Obligation to state reasons — Error of assessment — Concept of ‘association’ — Proportionality — Legal certainty)
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, freezing of assets, international sanctions, natural person, principle of legal certainty, principle of proportionality








C_202300323EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/323


30.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Pumpyanskiy v Council
(Case T-291/22) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine - Freezing of funds - Inclusion of the applicant's name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Error of assessment - Concept of ‘association’ - Proportionality - Legal certainty)
(C/2023/323)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Alexander Dmitrievich Pumpyanskiy (Geneva, Switzerland) (represented by: T. Bontinck, A. Guillerme, L. Burguin and M. Brésart, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.-C. Cadilhac and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Carpus Carcea and C. Giolito, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action, the applicant seeks, first, on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/397 of 9 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 80, p. 31), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/396 of 9 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 80, p. 1), in so far as those measures include his name on the lists annexed to those measures and, second, on the basis of Article 268 TFEU, compensation for the non-material harm he allegedly suffered as a result of the adoption of those measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Alexander Dmitrievich Pumpyanskiy to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.










3.


Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 257, 4.7.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/323/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-558/23, Dramanova: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Lukovit (Bulgaria) lodged on 6 September 2023 — Criminal proceedings against IC
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: TRIPS, administrative offence, fine, imprisonment, intellectual property, offence, principle of proportionality








C_202300644EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/644


13.11.2023





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Lukovit (Bulgaria) lodged on 6 September 2023 — Criminal proceedings against IC
(Case C-558/23, Dramanova (1))
(C/2023/644)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Rayonen sad Lukovit

Parties to the main proceedings

Rayonna prokuratura Lovech, Teritorialno otdelenie grad Lukovit, Bulgaria
IC

Questions referred







1.


Does the principle of proportionality permit a national legal provision, such as Article 172b of the Nakazatelen kodeks (Criminal Code), which provides for a custodial sentence of one to six years and a fine for a first infringement of intellectual property rights, irrespective of whether the unlawful use of a protected trade mark is wilful and/or on a commercial scale?










2.


If the first question is answered in the negative, how are the expressions ‘wilful’ and ‘on a commercial scale’, used in Article 61 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (the TRIPS Agreement), to be interpreted?










3.


Do the principles of legality and the prohibition of the arbitrary application of the law permit national legislation which simultaneously provides for liability under both administrative law (Article 127 of the Zakon za markite i geografskite oznachenia (Law on trade marks and geographical designations)) and criminal law (Article 172b of the Criminal Code), without laying down clear criteria allowing the degree of danger to the general public posed by one and the same act (unlawful use of protected trade marks) to be objectively and predictably assessed?






(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.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/644/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
CaseC-192/23: Order of the President of the Court of 6 September 2023 — European Commission v Republic of Latvia
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: action programme, environmental risk prevention, infringement of EU law, invasive species








C_202300647EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/647


13.11.2023





Order of the President of the Court of 6 September 2023 — European Commission v Republic of Latvia
(CaseC-192/23) (1)

(C/2023/647)
Language of the case: Latvian
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  
            OJ C 173, 15.5.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/647/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-107/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Adega Ponte da Boga v EUIPO — Viñedos y Bodegas Dominio de Tares (P3 DOMINIO DE TARES) (European Union trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — European Union figurative mark P3 DOMINIO DE TARES — Earlier national figurative mark P PONTE DA BOGA — Relative ground for invalidity — 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: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, wine








C_202300316EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/316


30.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Adega Ponte da Boga v EUIPO — Viñedos y Bodegas Dominio de Tares (P3 DOMINIO DE TARES)
(Case T-107/22) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - European Union figurative mark P3 DOMINIO DE TARES - Earlier national figurative mark P PONTE DA BOGA - Relative ground for invalidity - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(C/2023/316)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Adega Ponte da Boga, SL (Ourense, Spain) (represented by: C. Sueiras Villalobos and I. Pascual de Quinto Santos-Suárez, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája and J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Viñedos y Bodegas Dominio de Tares, SA (San Román de Bembibre, Spain) (represented by: V. Valero Piña, P. Olivos Reyes, A. González López-Menchero and C. López Riesco, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on 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 3 December 2021 (Case R 479/2021-1).

Operative part of the judgment







1.


The action is dismissed;










2.


Adega Ponte da Boga, SL, is ordered to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 165, 19.4.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/316/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-1/23: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Enmacc v Commission (Public supply contracts — Procurement procedure — Organisation of demand aggregation and tendering of gas under the EU Energy Platform — Negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice — Refusal of a request to participate in the procedure — Obligation to state reasons — Article 164(5)(f) of, and point 11.1(c) of Annex I to, Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 — Transparency — Equal treatment)
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: award of contract, equal treatment, invitation to tender, public procurement, tendering, transparency in decision-making








C_202300334EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/334


30.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Enmacc v Commission
(Case T-1/23) (1)

(Public supply contracts - Procurement procedure - Organisation of demand aggregation and tendering of gas under the EU Energy Platform - Negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice - Refusal of a request to participate in the procedure - Obligation to state reasons - Article 164(5)(f) of, and point 11.1(c) of Annex I to, Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 - Transparency - Equal treatment)
(C/2023/334)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Enmacc GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. von Bonin, A. Pliego Selie and T. van Helfteren, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Scharf, J. Estrada de Solà, G. Gattinara and S. Romoli, acting as Agents)

Re:
By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Commission of 12 December 2022 by which the Commission (i) launched the call for tenders ENER/2022/NP/0041 ‘Service for the organisation of demand aggregation and tendering of gas under the EU Energy Platform’ by way of a negotiated procedure without prior publication of a contract notice, (ii) did not invite the applicant to participate in that procedure, and (iii) expressly refused the applicant’s request to be invited to participate in that procedure.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Enmacc GmbH to pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief.






(1)  
            OJ C 54, 13.2.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/334/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-270/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Pumpyanskiy v Council (Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine — Freezing of funds — Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned — Error of assessment — Concept of ‘leading businessperson’ — Proportionality)
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU restrictive measure, Russia, Russo-Ukrainian issue, Ukraine, economic sanctions, entrepreneur, freezing of assets, international sanctions, natural person, principle of proportionality








C_202300319EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/319


30.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Pumpyanskiy v Council
(Case T-270/22) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine - Freezing of funds - Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned - Error of assessment - Concept of ‘leading businessperson’ - Proportionality)
(C/2023/319)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Dmitry Alexandrovich Pumpyanskiy (Ekaterinburg, Russia) (represented by: G. Lansky, P. Goeth, A. Egger and E. Steiner, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Van Overmeire, B. Driessen and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2022/397 of 9 March 2022 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 80, p. 31), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/396 of 9 March 2022 implementing Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine (OJ 2022 L 80, p. 1), in so far as those measures include his name on the lists annexed thereto.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Dmitry Alexandrovich Pumpyanskiy to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 257, 4.7.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/319/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-728/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Industrias Lácteas Asturianas v EUIPO — Qingdao United Dairy (NAMLAC) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark NAMLAC — Earlier Spanish figurative mark Analac — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2023-09-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, baby food, dietary product, food supplement, milk product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202300333EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2023/333


30.10.2023





Judgment of the General Court of 6 September 2023 — Industrias Lácteas Asturianas v EUIPO — Qingdao United Dairy (NAMLAC)
(Case T-728/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark NAMLAC - Earlier Spanish figurative mark Analac - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2023/333)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Industrias Lácteas Asturianas, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Riera Blanco, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Nicolás Gómez, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Qingdao United Dairy Co. Ltd (Qingdao, China)

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 6 September 2022 (Case R 1563/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Industrias Lácteas Asturianas, SA and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear their own respective costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 24, 23.1.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/333/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)