do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-1127/23: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – Butzkies-Schiemann v EUIPO – U.S. Corrosion Technologies (CorrosionX) (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark CorrosionX – Absolute ground for invalidity – Bad faith – Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Admissibility of the response filed before the Board of Appeal – Article 24(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, chemical product, registered trade mark, special chemicals, trade-mark law








C_202500180EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/180


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – Butzkies-Schiemann v EUIPO – U.S. Corrosion Technologies (CorrosionX)


(Case T-1127/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark CorrosionX - Absolute ground for invalidity - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Admissibility of the response filed before the Board of Appeal - Article 24(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
(C/2025/180)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sven Butzkies-Schiemann (Büdelsdorf, Germany) (represented by: C. Drzymalla, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: U.S. Corrosion Technologies LLC (Garland, Texas, United States) (represented by: D. von Schultz, lawyer)

Re:

By his 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 15 September 2023 (Case R 1795/2022-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Mr Sven Butzkies-Schiemann to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by U.S. Corrosion Technologies LLC;










3.


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






(1)  
            OJ C C/2024/967, 29.1.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/180/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.11630 – COVH / CDC / SOGECAP / MONT DU CENTRE / PHOENIX BELGIUM)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, France, economic concentration, hotel industry, life assurance, merger control, property leasing, public institution, real estate business








C_202502460EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2460


25.4.2025






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.11630 – COVH / CDC / SOGECAP / MONT DU CENTRE / PHOENIX BELGIUM)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/2460)

On 13 November 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 French 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 32024M11630. 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/2025/2460/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-580/24: Action brought on 13 November 2024 – Public.Resource.Org and Right to Know v Commission
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: access to EU information, right to information








C_202500573EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/573


3.2.2025






Action brought on 13 November 2024 – Public.Resource.Org and Right to Know v Commission


(Case T-580/24)

(C/2025/573)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicants: Public.Resource.Org, Inc. (Sebastopol, California, United States), Right to Know CLG (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: F. Logue, Solicitor, and J. Hackl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


Annul the implied decision of the European Commission dated 6 September 2024 to refuse access to documents in the format requested or in an existing format, as requested by the applicants under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001; (1)











—


Order the Commission to pay the applicants’ costs, pursuant to Articles 133 and 134 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, including the costs of any intervening parties.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on a single plea in law, alleging that the Commission failed to state reasons, in breach of Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, Article 41(2)(c) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and Article 296(2) TFEU.






—


It is argued that the Commission failed to make an express confirmatory decision and therefore has breached its obligation to provide the applicants with sufficient and adequate reasons for its implied decision to refuse access to documents in the format requested or in an existing format.






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/573/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-271/21: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – Ortis v Commission (Consumer protection – Substances prohibited, restricted or under EU scrutiny – Article 8(1) and (2) of, and Annex III to, Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 – Prohibition and placing under scrutiny of certain substances and preparations containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives – First and second entries in Article 1(1), and first and second entries in Article 1(2), of Regulation (EU) 2021/468 – Definition of substance, ingredient and preparations – Error of law)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: consumer protection, food safety, food supplement, health risk, inorganic chemical product, market approval








C_202500159EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/159


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – Ortis v Commission


(Case T-271/21)
                (1)

(Consumer protection - Substances prohibited, restricted or under EU scrutiny - Article 8(1) and (2) of, and Annex III to, Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 - Prohibition and placing under scrutiny of certain substances and preparations containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives - First and second entries in Article 1(1), and first and second entries in Article 1(2), of Regulation (EU) 2021/468 - Definition of ‘substance’, ‘ingredient’ and ‘preparations’ - Error of law)
(C/2025/159)
Language of the case: French

Parties


Applicant: Ortis (Bütgenbach, Belgium) (represented by: A. de Brosses, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Clotuche-Duvieusart, I. Galindo Martín and B. Rous Demiri, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/468 of 18 March 2021 amending Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards botanical species containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives (OJ 2021 L 96, p. 6), in so far as, by the first and second entries in Article 1(1) of that regulation and the first and second entries in Article 1(2) thereof, the European Commission included certain hydroxyanthracene derivatives and certain preparations in Parts A and C of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the addition of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods (OJ 2006 L 404, p. 26).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the first and second entries in Article 1(1), and the first and second entries in Article 1(2), of Commission Regulation (EU) No 2021/1468 of 18 March 2021 amending Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards botanical species containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives;










2.


Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 263, 5.7.2021.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/159/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-545/23: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – G.M.P. Group v EUIPO – Audi (Vehicle wheel rims) (Community design – Invalidity proceedings – Registered Community design representing vehicle wheel rims – Earlier design – Grounds for invalidity – Individual character – Overall impression – Degree of freedom of the designer – Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: designs and models, motor vehicle industry, vehicle parts








C_202500266EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/266


20.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – G.M.P. Group v EUIPO – Audi (Vehicle wheel rims)


(Case T-545/23)
                (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing vehicle wheel rims - Earlier design - Grounds for invalidity - Individual character - Overall impression - Degree of freedom of the designer - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
(C/2025/266)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: G.M.P. Group Srl (Albano Sant’Alessandro, Italy) (represented by: G. A. Bonadio, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Audi AG (Ingolstadt, Germany) (represented by: M. Orsingher, G. Mazzaglia and C. Cristalli, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 June 2023 (Case R 856/2022-3).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders G.M.P. Group Srl to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Audi AG in the proceedings before the General Court;










3.


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






(1)  
            OJ C C/2023/225, 23.10.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/266/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-444/23: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – SC Certinvest v EUIPO – Kiddinx Studios (Tina) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark Tina – Earlier EU figurative mark Bibi & Tina – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cosmetic product, hairdressing and beauty care, polishing and scouring preparations, registered trade mark, toiletries, trade-mark law








C_202500553EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/553


3.2.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – SC Certinvest v EUIPO – Kiddinx Studios (Tina)


(Case T-444/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Tina - Earlier EU figurative mark Bibi & Tina - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
(C/2025/553)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: SC Certinvest SRL (Păntăşeşti, Romania) (represented by: I. Speciac, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Kiddinx Studios GmbH (Berlin, Germany)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 17 May 2023 (Case R 1979/2022-5)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders SC Certinvest SRL and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear their own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 321, 11.9.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/553/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-524/23: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma v EUIPO – Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe (Shape of inhaler) (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Three-dimensional EU trade mark – Shape of an inhaler – Absolute ground for invalidity – Sign which consists exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result – Article 7(1)(e)(ii) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(e)(ii) and Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, pharmaceutical product, registered trade mark, respiratory disease, trade-mark law








C_202500172EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/172


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma v EUIPO – Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe (Shape of inhaler)


(Case T-524/23)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of an inhaler - Absolute ground for invalidity - Sign which consists exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result - Article 7(1)(e)(ii) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(e)(ii) and Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(C/2025/172)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG (Ingelheim, Germany) (represented by: I. Fowler and C. Stöber, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd (Harrow, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Dissmann and L. Jones, lawyers)

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 13 June 2023 (Case R 1558/2021-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C C/2023/72, 9.10.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/172/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-15/24: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – IServ v EUIPO – Jordanova and Others (IServ) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark IServ – Earlier national word mark Info Serv – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Legal authenticity of translations – Article 26 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/626)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cloud computing, computer equipment, consultancy, maintenance, registered trade mark, software, telecommunications, trade-mark law, traineeship








C_202500183EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/183


13.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – IServ v EUIPO – Jordanova and Others (IServ)


(Case T-15/24)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark IServ - Earlier national word mark Info Serv - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Legal authenticity of translations - Article 26 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/626)
(C/2025/183)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: IServ GmbH (Brunswick, Germany) (represented by: M. Wille, lawyer)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Victoria Dorovska (Sofia, Bulgaria), Stefan Jordanov (Ruse, Bulgaria), Nadja Jordanova (Ruse)

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 6 November 2023 (Case R 1556/2023-1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders each party to bear its own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C C/2024/1557, 26.2.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/183/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-221/23: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – WS v EUIPO (Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – Recruitment – Selection procedure EXT/22/08/AD 6/DTD–Business Analyst – Decision not to admit the applicant to the next stage of the procedure – Action for annulment – Rule of correspondence – Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations – Admissibility – Manifest error of assessment – Liability)
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, competition (EU), economics profession, indemnification, job vacancy, recruitment, staff regulations (EU), temporary employment








C_202500265EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/265


20.1.2025






Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2024 – WS v EUIPO


(Case T-221/23)
                (1)

(Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Recruitment - Selection procedure EXT/22/08/AD 6/DTD–Business Analyst - Decision not to admit the applicant to the next stage of the procedure - Action for annulment - Rule of correspondence - Article 91(2) of the Staff Regulations - Admissibility - Manifest error of assessment - Liability)
(C/2025/265)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: WS (represented by: H. Tettenborn, lawyer)

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

Re:

By his action based on Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks, first, annulment of the decision of the Selection Committee of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 June 2022, taken in the context of procedure EXT/22/08/AD 6/DTD–Business Analyst, not to admit him to the next stage of that procedure and, secondly, compensation in respect of the moral and immaterial damage he claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders WS to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C 261, 24.7.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/265/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.108904
Date: 2024-11-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: Denmark, Hovedstaden (region), State aid, air transport, control of State aid








C_202406838EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/6838


13.11.2024






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.108904
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2024/6838)








Date of adoption of the decision


10.10.2024




Aid number


SA.108904




Member State


Denmark




Region


BORNHOLMS AMT




Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)


SGEI compensation for Bornholm Airport




Legal basis


§ 28.56.03 in the Central Government Budget for 2023 and the Entrustment Act between The Danish Civil Aviation Authority and Bornholm Airport.




Type of measure


Scheme


 




Objective


Services of general economic interest




Form of aid


Direct grant




Budget


Overall budget: 278 800 000  DKK
Annual budget: 24 000 000  DKK




Intensity


 




Duration


1.1.2021 - 31.12.2026




Economic sectors


Air transport




Name and address of the granting authority







Danish Civil Aviation and Railway Authority




Carsten Niebuhrs Gade 43








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/2024/6838/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)