do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-101/23: Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Darila v EUIPO — Original Buff (Buffet) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative trade mark Buffet — Earlier EU word mark BUFF and earlier figurative mark Buff — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, registered trade mark, textile product, trade-mark law








C_202402306EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2306


2.4.2024





Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Darila v EUIPO — Original Buff (Buffet)
(Case T-101/23) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative trade mark Buffet - Earlier EU word mark BUFF and earlier figurative mark Buff - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2024/2306)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Michal Darila (Bratislava, Slovakia) (represented by: M. Holič, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Original Buff, SA (Igualada, Spain) (represented by M. Hernández Gázquez and E. Edissonov Kirilov, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks, in essence, annulment and alteration of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 December 2022 (Case R 528/2022-2)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Michal Darila to pay his own costs as well as those incurred by Original Buff, SA;










3.


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






(1)  
            OJ C 127, 11.4.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2306/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-101/24, Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 7 February 2024 – Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona v XYRALITY GmbH
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, Ireland, VAT, provision of services, supplier, supply, tax collection, tax relief, taxpayer








C_202403153EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3153


21.5.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 7 February 2024 – Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona v XYRALITY GmbH


(Case C-101/24, Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona)

(C/2024/3153)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant in the appeal on a point of law: Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: XYRALITY GmbH

Questions referred







1.


Under circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, in which a German taxable person (developer) supplied, before 1 January 2015, a service by electronic means to non-taxable persons (end customers) established within the territory of the European Union, via a marketplace for applications operated by an Irish taxable person, is Article 28 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (1) of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax to be applied, with the result that the Irish taxable person is treated as if it had received those services from the developer and supplied them to the end customers, because the marketplace for applications did not name the developer as the supplier of the service and show German VAT until it did so in the order confirmations issued to the end customers?










2.


If the first question referred is answered in the affirmative: Is the place of supply of the fictitious service supplied by the developer to the marketplace for applications under Article 28 of [Directive 2006/112] in Ireland, by virtue of Article 44 of [that directive], or in the Federal Republic of Germany, by virtue of Article 45 [thereof]?










3.


If, by virtue of the answers to the first and second questions referred for a preliminary ruling, the developer has not supplied any services in the Federal Republic of Germany: Is the developer subject to a tax liability for German VAT under Article 203 of [Directive 2006/112], on the ground that the marketplace for applications, acting in accordance with an agreement, named the developer as the supplier of the service and showed German VAT in the order confirmations it sent by email to the end customers, even though the end customers are not entitled to deduct input VAT?






(1)  Council Directive of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3153/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 6 February 2024
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202401133EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1133


7.2.2024






Euro exchange rates (1)


            6 February 2024
         
(C/2024/1133)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,0743 




JPY


Japanese yen


159,56 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4605 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,85460 




SEK


Swedish krona


11,3825 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9366 




ISK


Iceland króna


148,10 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,4580 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,925 




HUF


Hungarian forint


386,85 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3463 




RON


Romanian leu


4,9763 




TRY


Turkish lira


32,8325 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,6515 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4526 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


8,4042 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,7713 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,4448 




KRW


South Korean won


1 426,76 




ZAR


South African rand


20,3273 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,7231 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


16 909,43 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


5,1196 




PHP


Philippine peso


60,376 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


38,267 




BRL


Brazilian real


5,3380 




MXN


Mexican peso


18,3200 




INR


Indian rupee


89,2155 






(1)  
            Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1133/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-318/23: Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — J&B v EUIPO — Ergün (J&B BRO) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark J&B BRO — Earlier EU figurative marks 4BRO — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, aerated drink, registered trade mark, smoking, tobacco industry, trade-mark law








C_202402309EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2309


2.4.2024





Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — J&B v EUIPO — Ergün (J&B BRO)
(Case T-318/23) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark J&B BRO - Earlier EU figurative marks 4BRO - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2024/2309)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: J&B Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands) (represented by: C. Thomas and B. Reiter, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Engin Ergün (Dortmund, Germany)

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 April 2023 (Case R 2012/2022-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders J&B Ltd and the European Union Intellectual Property Office each to bear their own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 261, 24.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2309/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-40/23: Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Hatherly v EUAA (Civil service — Staff of the EUAA — Recruitment — Vacancy notice — Selection procedure for posts of assistants — Job offer — Condition relating to level of post-secondary education attested by a diploma and appropriate professional experience acquired after having obtained the diploma — Withdrawal of job offer — Error of assessment — Equal treatment — Proportionality — Liability)
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: assistant, competition (EU), diploma, equal treatment, indemnification, job vacancy, principle of proportionality, professional experience, professional qualifications








C_202402302EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2302


2.4.2024





Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Hatherly v EUAA
(Case T-40/23) (1)

(Civil service - Staff of the EUAA - Recruitment - Vacancy notice - Selection procedure for posts of assistants - Job offer - Condition relating to level of post-secondary education attested by a diploma and appropriate professional experience acquired after having obtained the diploma - Withdrawal of job offer - Error of assessment - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Liability)
(C/2024/2302)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Xavier James Hatherly (Hamrun, Malta) (represented by: A. Grima, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) (represented by: P. Eyckmans, M. Stamatopoulou and D. Testa, acting as Agents, and by T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of 8 April 2022 of the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) to withdraw the job offer made to him for the post of Administrative Assistant (Selection Procedure EASO/2021/TA/007) and the decision of 3 November 2022 to reject his complaint and, second, compensation for the loss of earnings suffered by him to date.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 127, 11.4.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2302/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11449 – TELEFONICA BRASIL / AUREN COMERCIALIZADORA / JV)
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Brazil, cloud computing, economic concentration, electrical energy, energy industry, energy market, merger control, provision of services, telecommunications








C_202401600EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1600


15.2.2024






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11449 – TELEFONICA BRASIL / AUREN COMERCIALIZADORA / JV)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/1600)

On 7 February 2024, 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 English 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 32024M11449. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.






(1)  
            OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1600/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-102/24 P: Appeal brought on 7 February 2024 by Transport Werk GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 20 December 2023 in Case T-779/22, Transport Werk GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, marketing, real estate business, registered trade mark, report, software, trade-mark law








C_202403584EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3584


17.6.2024






Appeal brought on 7 February 2024 by Transport Werk GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 20 December 2023 in Case T-779/22, Transport Werk GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office


(Case C-102/24 P)

(C/2024/3584)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Appellant: Transport Werk GmbH (represented by: D. Donath, Rechtsanwältin)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Haus & Grund Deutschland Zentralverband der Deutschen Haus-, Wohnungs- und Grundeigentümer e.V.
By order of 30 April 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) refused to allow the appeal to proceed and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3584/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Decision of the General Court of 7 February 2024 on judicial vacations
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: holiday, operation of the Institutions, public holiday








C_202402124EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/2124


12.3.2024







            DECISION OF THE GENERAL COURT
         
of 7 February 2024
         
on judicial vacations
(C/2024/2124)


THE GENERAL COURT

Having regard to Article 41(2) of the Rules of Procedure,

HAS DECIDED:




Article 1

For the judicial year beginning on 1 September 2024, the dates of the judicial vacations within the meaning of Article 41(2) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure are as follows:






—


Christmas 2024: from Monday 16 December 2024 to Sunday 5 January 2025 inclusive;










—


Easter 2025: from Monday 14 April 2025 to Sunday 27 April 2025 inclusive;










—


Summer 2025: from Wednesday 16 July 2025 to Sunday 31 August 2025 inclusive.







Article 2

This decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.




Luxembourg, 8 February 2024.


Registrar

V. DI BUCCI
            



President

M. VAN DER WOUDE
            





ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2124/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-220/23: Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Casal sport v EUIPO — Tennis d’Aquitaine (CITY STADE) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark CITY STADE — Trade mark which has become the common name in the trade for a product or service in respect of which it is registered — Activity or inactivity of the proprietor — Article 58(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building, registered trade mark, sports facilities, trade-mark law








C_202402307EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2307


2.4.2024





Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Casal sport v EUIPO — Tennis d’Aquitaine (CITY STADE)
(Case T-220/23) (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark CITY STADE - Trade mark which has become the common name in the trade for a product or service in respect of which it is registered - Activity or inactivity of the proprietor - Article 58(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2024/2307)
Language of the case: French

Parties


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

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Tennis d'Aquitaine SAS (Ambares, France) (represented by: A. Hinoux and V. Le Coq de Kerland, lawyers)

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 3 February 2023 (Case R 179/2022-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 3 February 2023 (Case R 179/2022-2);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs;










3.


Orders Tennis d’Aquitaine SAS to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Sports et loisirs (Casal sport) in the proceedings before the Court and the Board of Appeal.






(1)  
            OJ C 223, 26.6.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2307/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-100/24, bonprix: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 7 February 2024 – Verbraucherzentrale Hamburg e. V. v bonprix Handelsgesellschaft mbH
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: advertising, consumer protection, contract terms, electronic commerce, invoicing, payment, purchase, sales promotion, value of trade








C_202403152EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3152


21.5.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 7 February 2024 – Verbraucherzentrale Hamburg e. V. v bonprix Handelsgesellschaft mbH


(Case C-100/24, bonprix)

(C/2024/3152)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant on a point of law: Verbraucherzentrale Hamburg e. V.

Defendant and respondent on a point of law: bonprix Handelsgesellschaft mbH

Question referred

Does advertising with a payment arrangement (in the present case, ‘convenient purchase on invoice’), which, while having only a low monetary value, contributes to the safety and legal interests of the consumer (in the present case, no disclosure of sensitive payment data; in the case of rescission of the contract, no reclamation of an advance payment), constitute a promotional offer within the meaning of Article 6(c) of Directive 2000/31/EC (1) on electronic commerce?


(1)  Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3152/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-356/23: Order of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Axima Concept and Others v Fusion for Energy Joint Undertaking
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: France, claim, consortium, contract, indemnification, interest, service








C_202402337EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2337


2.4.2024





Order of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Axima Concept and Others v Fusion for Energy Joint Undertaking
(Case T-356/23) (1)

(C/2024/2337)
Language of the case: English
The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  
            OJ C, C/2023/47, 9.10.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2337/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-74/23: Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Oriflame Cosmetics v EUIPO — Caramé (O) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark O — Earlier international registration in respect of the figurative mark O — Relative grounds for refusal — No genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
Date: 2024-02-07
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202402303EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2303


2.4.2024





Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2024 — Oriflame Cosmetics v EUIPO — Caramé (O)
(Case T-74/23) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark O - Earlier international registration in respect of the figurative mark O - Relative grounds for refusal - No genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 42(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(C/2024/2303)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Oriflame Cosmetics AG (Schaffhausen, Switzerland) (represented by: N. Gerling and U. Pfleghar, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Caramé Holding AG (Sulzbach, Germany) (represented by: M. Ebner and R. Lange, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and the alteration of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 December 2022 (Case R 938/2022-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 December 2022 (R 938/2022-2);










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay half of those incurred by Oriflame Cosmetics AG;










4.


Orders Caramé Holding AG to bear its own costs and to pay half of those incurred by Oriflame Cosmetics.






(1)  
            OJ C 121, 3.4.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2303/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)