do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-359/23: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – Société des produits Nestlé v EUIPO – Amigüitos pets & life (THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect – Earlier EU word mark ONE – Relative grounds for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Decision taken following the annulment of an earlier decision by the General Court – Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Res judicata – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, dietary product, food supplement, pet food, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, veterinary medicinal product, vitamin








C_202500170EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/170


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – Société des produits Nestlé v EUIPO – Amigüitos pets & life (THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect)


(Case T-359/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark THE ONLY ONE by alphaspirit wild and perfect - Earlier EU word mark ONE - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Decision taken following the annulment of an earlier decision by the General Court - Article 72(6) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Res judicata - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(C/2025/170)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz and C. Elkemann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Amigüitos pets & life, SA (Lorca, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

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 30 March 2023 (Case R 424/2020-2), relating to opposition proceedings between the applicant and the intervener.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Société des produits Nestlé SA to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 296, 21.8.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/170/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-768/24, Hortis: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 6 November 2024 – Hortis GRC SA v JA, Pôle emploi Île-de-France
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, labour law, labour relations, private international law, work contract








C_202500886EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/886


17.2.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 6 November 2024 – Hortis GRC SA v JA, Pôle emploi Île-de-France


(Case C-768/24, Hortis)

(C/2025/886)
Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Hortis GRC SA

Respondent: JA, Pôle emploi Île-de-France

Questions referred







1.


Must the concluding part of Article 6 of the Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980, (1) be interpreted as meaning that, where the parties choose the law governing an employment contract, the national court must, pursuant to the concluding part of that provision, disregard the mandatory rules, affording greater protection than those of the law chosen by the parties, of the law which the employee seeks to have applied and which would be applicable in the absence of a choice in accordance with Article 6(2) of that convention where it appears from the circumstances as a whole that the contract is more closely connected with the country whose law has been chosen by the parties to govern the employment contract?










2.


If so, is the national court required to take into account the closer connections resulting, in the performance of the employment contract, from the parties’ choice of the applicable law, or must that court disregard them when determining whether the mandatory rules of the law of another country sought by the employee are applicable pursuant to Article 6(2) of the Rome Convention?






(1)  
            OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/886/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-764/24, Capurteli: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Palermo (Italy) lodged on 6 November 2024 – Questore di Agrigento – Ministero dell’interno v GC
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: foreign national, international protection, public safety, right of asylum, right to an effective remedy, third country








C_202500387EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/387


27.1.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Palermo (Italy) lodged on 6 November 2024 – Questore di Agrigento – Ministero dell’interno v GC


(Case C-764/24, Capurteli)
                (1)

(C/2025/387)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Palermo

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Questore di Agrigento – Ministero dell’interno

Defendant: GC

Question referred

Must EU law and, in particular, Articles 36, 37 and 46 of Directive 2013/32/EU (2) be interpreted as precluding a third country from being designated as a safe country of origin where there are categories of persons in that country in respect of whom that country does not meet the substantive conditions for such designation, as set out in Annex I to the directive.


(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)  Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/387/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, European Commission
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, France, United Kingdom, catch area, catch by species, catch quota, fishing rights, international waters, sea fish, sea fishing, territorial waters








C_202406736EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/6736


6.11.2024






Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries
(C/2024/6736)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:






Date and time of closure


31.7.2024




Duration


31.7.2024 - 31.12.2024




Member State


France




Stock or Group of stocks


LIN/05EI.




Species


Ling (Molva molva)




Zone


United Kingdom and international waters of 5




Type(s) of fishing vessels


—




Reference number


29/TQ257






(1)  
            OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6736/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-632/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – MeSoFa v ECB (Access to documents – Decision 2004/258/EC – ECB’s assessment that Sberbank banka was failing or likely to fail – Refusal to grant access – Action for annulment – Act not open to challenge – Admissibility – Article 22(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Article 32(1) of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 – Supervised entity – Shareholders’ rights of defence – Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Right of access to the ECB’s file)
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, access to EU information, bank, bank resolution, company in difficulties, financial supervision, rights of the defence, shareholder








C_202500162EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/162


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – MeSoFa v ECB


(Case T-632/22)
                (1)

(Access to documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - ECB’s assessment that Sberbank banka was failing or likely to fail - Refusal to grant access - Action for annulment - Act not open to challenge - Admissibility - Article 22(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Article 32(1) of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 - Supervised entity - Shareholders’ rights of defence - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Right of access to the ECB’s file)
(C/2025/162)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: MeSoFa Vermögensverwaltungs AG, formerly Sber Vermögensverwaltungs AG, initially Sberbank Europe AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: O. Behrends, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: E. Yoo, S. Letocart and M. Ioannidis, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 27 July 2022, by which the ECB refused its request for access to the confidential version of the failing or likely to fail assessment in respect of Sberbank banka d.d., for the purposes of Article 18(1)(a) and (4)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders MeSoFa Vermögensverwaltungs AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).






(1)  
            OJ C 482, 19.12.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/162/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-767/24, Kuszycka: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 6 November 2024 – mBank S.A. v ML
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, consumer credit, consumer protection, limitation of legal proceedings, real estate credit, redemption, unfair terms of contract








C_202500709EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/709


10.2.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 6 November 2024 – mBank S.A. v ML


(Case C-767/24, Kuszycka)
                (1)

(C/2025/709)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: mBank S.A.

Defendant: ML

Question referred

Must Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (2) and the principle of effectiveness be interpreted as precluding a judicial interpretation of national provisions according to which, in the context of the invalidity of a mortgage loan agreement in its entirety because it is not capable of continuing in existence without the unfair terms, the lodging, by the consumer, of a declaration that he or she wishes to set off his or her claim against the bank’s claim for repayment of the loan capital is equivalent to the consumer’s waiving his or her objection that the bank’s claim is time-barred?


(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 1993 L 95, p. 29.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/709/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.115578
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Czechia, State aid, aid to undertakings, control of State aid, regional aid








C_202406773EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/6773


6.11.2024






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.115578
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/6773)








Date of adoption of the decision


3.10.2024




Aid number


SA.115578




Member State


Czechia




Region


 




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


Změna mapy regionální podpory pro Česko (1. ledna 2022 – 31. prosince 2027) –zvýšené intenzity podpory pro investice, na něž se vztahuje nařízení o platformě STEP




Legal basis


-




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Regional development




Form of aid


 




Budget


 




Intensity


 




Duration


1.3.2024 - 31.12.2027




Economic sectors


All economic sectors eligible to receive aid




Name and address of the granting authority







Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže




třída Kpt. Jaroše 7, 602 00 Brno








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/2024/6773/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-507/23: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – ZB v EUIPO – Muhsinoglu (X ENERGY DRINK) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark ENERGY DRINK – Earlier EU figurative mark X Energy Drink – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, aerated drink, alcoholic beverage, fruit juice, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202500068EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/68


6.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – ZB v EUIPO – Muhsinoglu (X ENERGY DRINK)


(Case T-507/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ENERGY DRINK - Earlier EU figurative mark X Energy Drink - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(C/2025/68)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: ZB (represented by: P. Korolko, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Siyabend Goran Muhsinoglu (Troisdorf, Germany) (represented by: C. Weil, lawyer)

Re:

By his 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 23 June 2023 (Case R 221/2023-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders ZB, in addition to bearing his own costs, to pay those incurred by Siyabend Goran Muhsinoglu before the General Court;










3.


Declares that the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C C/2023/219, 23.10.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/68/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-315/23: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – AL v Council (Civil service – Officials – Promotion – 2022 promotion exercise – Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AST 5 – Consideration of the comparative merits – Misconduct – Abuse of power)
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: abuse of power, assistant, promotion, staff assessment








C_202500065EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/65


6.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – AL v Council


(Case T-315/23)
                (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - 2022 promotion exercise - Decision not to promote the applicant to grade AST 5 - Consideration of the comparative merits - Misconduct - Abuse of power)
(C/2025/65)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: AL (represented by: R. Rata, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Alver, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action under Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Council of the European Union of 18 July 2022 not to promote him to grade AST 5.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders AL to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 296, 21.8.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/65/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-790/22: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – MeSoFa v ECB (Access to documents – Decision 2004/258/EC – Failing or likely to fail assessment of Sberbank banka – Refusal to grant access – Obligation to state reasons – Exception relating to the protection of the confidentiality of information that is protected as such under EU law – Concept of confidential information – Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests)
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, access to EU information, bank, bank resolution, company in difficulties, confidentiality








C_202500164EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/164


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – MeSoFa v ECB


(Case T-790/22)
                (1)

(Access to documents - Decision 2004/258/EC - ‘Failing or likely to fail’ assessment of Sberbank banka - Refusal to grant access - Obligation to state reasons - Exception relating to the protection of the confidentiality of information that is protected as such under EU law - Concept of ‘confidential information’ - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests)
(C/2025/164)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: MeSoFa Vermögensverwaltungs AG, formerly Sber Vermögensverwaltungs AG, initially Sberbank Europe AG (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: O. Behrends, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: D. Báez Seara and M. Ioannidis, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Decision LS/CL/2022/218 of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 21 September 2022 refusing to grant full access to the ‘failing or likely to fail’ assessment of Sberbank banka d.d., within the meaning of Article 18(1)(a) and (4)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ 2014 L 225, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders MeSoFa Vermögensverwaltungs AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).






(1)  
            OJ C 63, 20.2.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/164/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-425/23: Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – Consejo Regulador Aceite de Jaén v EUIPO – Agrícola La Loma (VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLÓGICOS) (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU figurative mark VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLOGICOS – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Article 7(1)(f), (g) and (j) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Admissibility of the evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 95(1) and (2) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Right to be heard – Article 94(1), second sentence, of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-11-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, agricultural product, fruit, olive oil, processed food product, processed foodstuff, registered trade mark, trade-mark law, vegetable








C_202500067EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/67


6.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 6 November 2024 – Consejo Regulador ‘Aceite de Jaén’ v EUIPO – Agrícola La Loma (VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLÓGICOS)


(Case T-425/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark VEGA DEL OBISPO BIO Jaén PRODUCTOS ECOLOGICOS - Absolute grounds for invalidity - Article 7(1)(f), (g) and (j) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Admissibility of the evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Article 95(1) and (2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Right to be heard - Article 94(1), second sentence, of Regulation 2017/1001)
(C/2025/67)
Language of the case: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Consejo Regulador de la Indicación Geográfica Protegida ‘Aceite de Jaén’ (Mengíbar, Spain) (represented by: F. Muñoz Calvo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gaja, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Agrícola La Loma S. Coop. Andaluza (Torreblascopedro, Spain)

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 1 June 2023 (Case R 1119/2022-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 June 2023 (Case R 1119/2022-1);










2.


Dismisses the action as to the remainder;










3.


Orders EUIPO to pay, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by Consejo Regulador de la Indicación Geográfica Protegida ‘Aceite de Jaén’.






(1)  
            OJ C 321, 11.9.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/67/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)