do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-747/22: Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2024 – BIW Invest v EUIPO – New Yorker Marketing & Media International (Compton)
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, personal effects, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202402614EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2614


22.4.2024






Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2024 – BIW Invest v EUIPO – New Yorker Marketing & Media International (Compton)


(Case T-747/22)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Word mark COMPTON - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Lack of descriptiveness - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(C/2024/2614)
Language of the case: German

Parties


Applicant: BIW Invest (Appenzell, Switzerland) (represented by: E. Mielke, U. Stelzenmüller and J. Weiser, lawyers)

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, intervener before the General Court: New Yorker Marketing & Media International GmbH (Brunswick, Germany) (represented by: M. Hartmann, S. Fröhlich and H. Lerchl, 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 16 September 2022 (Case R 1913/2021-2).

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 16 September 2022 (Case R 1913/2021-2);










2.


Orders EUIPO and New Yorker Marketing & Media International GmbH to each bear, in addition to their own costs, half of those incurred by BIW Invest AG, including costs necessarily incurred for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.






(1)  
            OJ C 24, 23.1.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2614/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-184/23: Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2024 – Puma v EUIPO – Société d’équipements de boulangerie pâtisserie (BERTRAND PUMA La griffe boulangère)
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, bread-making, engine, food processing, industrial electric machinery, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202402617EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2617


22.4.2024






Judgment of the General Court of 28 February 2024 – Puma v EUIPO – Société d’équipements de boulangerie pâtisserie (BERTRAND PUMA La griffe boulangère)


(Case T-184/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark BERTRAND PUMA La griffe boulangère - Earlier EU figurative mark PUMA - Relative ground for refusal - No damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Link between the marks at issue)
(C/2024/2617)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke and P. Trieb, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Société d’équipements de boulangerie pâtisserie (Portes-Lès-Valence, France)

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 23 January 2023 (Case R 2420/2020-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Puma SE to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 179, 22.5.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2617/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-128/24: Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health v EUIPO – Multi Access (Device of three Chinese characters)
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, EU trade mark, beverage, medical plant, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_202402783EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2783


29.4.2024






Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health v EUIPO – Multi Access (Device of three Chinese characters)


(Case T-128/24)

(C/2024/2783)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd (Guangzhou, China) (represented by: P. Groß, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Multi Access Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands)

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 figurative mark (Device of three Chinese characters) – European Union trade mark No 13 497 052
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2023 in Case R 329/2023-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


declare the contested mark invalid on the basis of Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009;










—


order EUIPO and Multi Access Limited, in case that the latter decides to intervene, to bear their own costs;










—


order EUIPO and Multi Access Limited, in case that the latter decides to intervene, to pay the costs incurred by the applicant, including those the latter party incurred before the Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council).






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2783/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Cases where the Commission raises no objections – SA.111347Text with EEA relevance.
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: France, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid








C_202401748EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1748


28.2.2024






Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Cases where the Commission raises no objections
SA.111347
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/1748)







Date of adoption of the decision


16.2.2024




Aid number


SA.111347




Member State


France




Region


 




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Aide d'urgence ‘électricité’ pour 2024 en faveur des entreprises de taille intermédiaire (ETI) particulièrement affectées par les conséquences économiques et financières de la guerre en Ukraine (dite ‘guichet ETI’)




Legal basis


Décret instituant une aide visant à compenser la hausse des coûts d’approvisionnement d’électricité des entreprises particulièrement affectées par les conséquences économiques et financières de la guerre en Ukraine




Type of measure


Scheme




Objective


Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 40 000 000  EUR
Annual budget: 40 000 000  EUR




Intensity


 




Duration


Until 30.6.2024




Economic sectors


All economic sectors eligible to receive aid




Name and address of the granting authority







Ministère de l'économie, des finances et de la souveraineté industrielle et numérique




139 rue de Bercy, 75012 Paris








Other information


 




The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:
https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search?caseInstrument=SA


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1748/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-121/24: Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health v EUIPO – Multi Access (Device of three Chinese characters in a frame)
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, EU trade mark, beverage, medical plant, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_202402776EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2776


29.4.2024






Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health v EUIPO – Multi Access (Device of three Chinese characters in a frame)


(Case T-121/24)

(C/2024/2776)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd (Guangzhou, China) (represented by: P. Groß, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Multi Access Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands)

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 figurative mark (Device of three Chinese characters in a frame) – European Union trade mark No 13 496 989
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2023 in Case R 322/2023-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


declare the contested mark invalid on the basis of Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009;










—


order EUIPO and Multi Access Limited, in case that the latter decides to intervene, to bear their own costs;










—


order EUIPO and Multi Access Limited, in case that the latter decides to intervene, to pay the costs incurred by the applicant, including those the latter party incurred before the Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council).






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2776/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.11477 – QUATTROR / MASSIMO ZANETTI BEVERAGE GROUP) – Candidate case for simplified procedure
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: beverage industry, coffee, economic concentration, holding company, investment company, merger control, processed foodstuff, tea








C_202401808EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
Series C













C/2024/1808


28.2.2024






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.11477 – QUATTROR / MASSIMO ZANETTI BEVERAGE GROUP)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/1808)


1.   
On 20 February 2024, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:






—


QuattroR SGR S.p.A. (‘QuattroR’, Italy), controlled by QR Partners S.r.l.,










—


Massimo Zanetti Beverage Group S.p.A. (‘MZBG’, Italy), ultimately controlled by Mr. Massimo Zanetti.




QuattroR will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of MZBG.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.


2.   
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are the following:






—


QuattroR is a management company that currently controls, exclusively or jointly undertakings active in a range of different sectors, such as engineering and logistics, distribution of ceramic tiles and wall surfaces, fashion, pulp and paper, food processing and packaging, medical devices, and electronic products,










—


MZBG is active in the production, processing and marketing of roasted coffee, distributed worldwide.






3.   
On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified treatment for certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.


4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
M.11477 – QUATTROR / MASSIMO ZANETTI BEVERAGE GROUP
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Postal 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’).

(2)  
            OJ C 160, 5.5.2023, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1808/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-158/24, Rojcki: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 28 February 2024 – J.P. v A.T., J.B. and Skarb Państwa – Prezes Sądu Okręgowego w O.
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: appointment of staff, higher court, independence of the judiciary, judge, right to an effective remedy








C_202403589EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3589


17.6.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 28 February 2024 – J.P. v A.T., J.B. and Skarb Państwa – Prezes Sądu Okręgowego w O.


(Case C-158/24, Rojcki)
                (1)

(C/2024/3589)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Najwyższy

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: J.P.

Defendants: A.T., J.B. and Skarb Państwa – Prezes Sądu Okręgowego w O.

Question referred

Must Article 2, Article 6(1) and (3) and the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that an act establishing the composition of a court, such as the order of a President of the Supreme Court who directs the work of a Chamber of the Supreme Court, does not produce legal effects if the composition of the court thus established is not an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law within the meaning of European Union law, in particular having regard to:






(a)


the participation in its collegial composition of persons who have been appointed to the position of Supreme Court judge in a manner that is manifestly contrary to the provisions of national law concerning the appointment of judges, which has been established in the final rulings of the national court of highest instance, where those persons constitute a majority of the composition of the court;










(b)


the fact that the composition of the court was established in the manner indicated above by a President of the Supreme Court who has been appointed to the position of Supreme Court judge under the same circumstances and in breach of the rules concerning the appointment of a Supreme Court judge as a President of the Supreme Court?






(1)  The present case has been given a fictitious name which does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3589/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-119/24: Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Taokaenoi Food & Marketing v EUIPO – Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb (TAO KAE NOI)
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, algae, fishery product, potato, processed food product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_202402639EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2639


22.4.2024






Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Taokaenoi Food & Marketing v EUIPO – Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb (TAO KAE NOI)


(Case T-119/24)

(C/2024/2639)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Taokaenoi Food & Marketing plc (Nonthaburi, Thailand) (represented by: B. Lhomme-Houzai, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb Stiftung & Co. KG (Nuremberg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative trade mark TAO KAE NOI – Application for registration No 18 517 834)

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2023 in Case R 596/2023-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and the decision of the Opposition Division of 20 January 2023;










—


reject the opposition n° B 3 154 347 lodged by Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb Stiftung & Co.KG. against the registration of the trademark application No 18 517 834;










—


order EUIPO and if it intervenes, Norma Lebensmittelfilialbetrieb Stiftung & Co.KG., to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by Taokaenoi Food & Marketing Public Company Limited at every stage of the opposition and appeal proceedings.





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/2024/2639/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-385/23: Order of the General Court of 28 February 2024 – Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși v European Public Prosecutor’s Office
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: judicial review, jurisdiction, public prosecution








C_202402624EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2624


22.4.2024






Order of the General Court of 28 February 2024 – Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși v European Public Prosecutor’s Office


(Case T-385/23)
                (1)

(Action for annulment - Decision of a Permanent Chamber of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office to bring a case to judgment - Article 42(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 - Procedural act of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office - Lack of jurisdiction)
(C/2024/2624)
Language of the case: Romanian

Parties


Applicant: Constantin Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: A. Şandru and M.-A. Ion, lawyers)

Defendant: European Public Prosecutor’s Office (represented by: L. De Matteis, F.-R. Radu and E. Farhat, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Tenth Permanent Chamber of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office of 8 December 2022 by which it referred the case concerning him for judgment.

Operative part of the order







1.


The action is dismissed.










2.


There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the Council of the European Union, the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA).










3.


Mr Constantin Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși shall bear his own costs and pay those of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, with the exception of those relating to the applications for leave to intervene.










4.


Mr Mincu Pătrașcu Brâncuși, the Council, the Commission, the Parliament and ECBA shall bear their own costs relating to the applications for leave to intervene.






(1)  
            OJ C 321, 11.9.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2624/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-127/24: Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health v EUIPO – Multi Access (WANG LAO JI)
Date: 2024-02-28
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: China, EU trade mark, beverage, medical plant, registered trade mark, tea, trade-mark law








C_202402782EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/2782


29.4.2024






Action brought on 28 February 2024 – Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health v EUIPO – Multi Access (WANG LAO JI)


(Case T-127/24)

(C/2024/2782)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Guangzhou Wanglaoji Grand Health Co. Ltd (Guangzhou, China) (represented by: P. Groß, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Multi Access Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands)

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 WANG LAO JI – European Union trade mark No 13 496 906
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2023 in Case R 328/2023-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


declare the contested mark invalid on the basis of Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009;










—


order EUIPO and Multi Access Limited, in case that the latter decides to intervene, to bear their own costs;










—


order EUIPO and Multi Access Limited, in case that the latter decides to intervene, to pay the costs incurred by the applicant, including those the latter party incurred before the Board of Appeal.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council).






ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2782/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)