do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-543/24: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Aboca v EUIPO – Azienda Agroalimentare Grignano (ABOCA) (EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark ABOCA – Genuine use of the mark – Article 18 and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Proof of genuine use – Assessment of the evidence)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, alcoholic beverage, cereal product, cocoa, coffee, confectionery, confectionery product, instant product, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202600170EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/170


12.1.2026






Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Aboca v EUIPO – Azienda Agroalimentare Grignano (ABOCA)


(Case T-543/24)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU word mark ABOCA - Genuine use of the mark - Article 18 and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use - Assessment of the evidence)
(C/2026/170)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Aboca SpA Soc. agr. (Sansepolcro, Italy) (represented by: C. Comolli Acquaviva, K. Muraro and G. Russo, lawyers)

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: Azienda Agroalimentare Grignano Srl (Pontassieve, Italy) (represented by: S. Bernardini, V. Jandoli, V. Piccarreta and A. Sobol, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 8 August 2024 (Case R 555/2023-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders SpA Soc. agr. to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Azienda Agroalimentare Grignano Srl for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2024/7368, 16.12.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/170/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-563/24: Order of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Gürok v EUIPO – Olav (Làv) (EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU figurative mark Làv – Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Proof of genuine use – Assessment of the evidence – Unreasonable or excessive burden of proof – Principle of good administration – Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, ceramics, glass, household article, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202600323EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/323


26.1.2026






Order of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Gürok v EUIPO – Olav (Làv)


(Case T-563/24)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark Làv - Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use - Assessment of the evidence - Unreasonable or excessive burden of proof - Principle of good administration - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)
(C/2026/323)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Gürok Turizm ve Madencilik AŞ (Kütahya, Türkiye) (represented by: J. Erdozain López, J. Vicente Martínez and M. López Camba, lawyers)

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: Olav GmbH (Cologne, Germany)

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 22 August 2024 (Case R 214/2024-4).

Operative part of the order







1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 August 2024 (Case R 214/2024-4);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Gürok Turizm ve Madencilik AŞ.






(1)  
            OJ C 2024/7377, 16.12.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/323/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Euro exchange rates – 18 November 2025
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_202505660EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5660


19.11.2025






Euro exchange rates (1)


            18 November 2025
         
(C/2025/5660)


1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1590 




JPY


Japanese yen


179,94 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4684 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,88210 




SEK


Swedish krona


10,9970 




CHF


Swiss franc


0,9233 




ISK


Iceland króna


147,20 




NOK


Norwegian krone


11,7333 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


24,188 




HUF


Hungarian forint


384,96 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,2440 




RON


Romanian leu


5,0870 




TRY


Turkish lira


49,0676 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,7830 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,6257 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,0233 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


2,0459 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5093 




KRW


South Korean won


1 695,61 




ZAR


South African rand


19,9751 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


8,2410 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


19 420,32 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,8261 




PHP


Philippine peso


68,182 




RUB


Russian rouble


 




THB


Thai baht


37,569 




BRL


Brazilian real


6,1893 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,3761 




INR


Indian rupee


102,6440 






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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5660/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-158/24: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Piql v Commission (Grant agreement signed as part of the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) – Ultra-secure data storage and long-term preservation of digital and analogue data – Decision to recover part of the grant – Enforceable decision – Article 299 TFEU – Article 110 of the EEA Agreement – Eligible costs – Article 122(2)(b) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 – Article 23(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1290/2013 – Concepts of linked third parties and affiliated entities – Admissibility of evidence)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: European Economic Area, Framework Programme for Research and Development, eligibility criteria, evidence, information storage, innovation, project funding, property leasing, reimbursement of aid








C_202600109EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/109


5.1.2026






Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Piql v Commission


(Case T-158/24)
                (1)

(Grant agreement signed as part of the ‘Horizon 2020’ Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) - Ultra-secure data storage and long-term preservation of digital and analogue data - Decision to recover part of the grant - Enforceable decision - Article 299 TFEU - Article 110 of the EEA Agreement - Eligible costs - Article 122(2)(b) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 - Article 23(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1290/2013 - Concepts of ‘linked third parties’ and ‘affiliated entities’ - Admissibility of evidence)
(C/2026/109)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Piql AS (Drammen, Norway) (represented by: L. Garnes and T. Fjeldskaar, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Onozó and T. Van Noyen, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Commission Decision C(2024) 414 final of 17 January 2024 relating to the recovery of EUR 245 161,28 plus default interest, in so far as that decision concerns the rental costs for 10 PiqlReaders which the applicant rented from Tronrud Engineering AS.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Piql AS to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2024/3338, 3.6.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/109/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-23/25: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – HH v Commission (Civil service – Officials – Recruitment – Notice of competition – Open competition EPSO/AD/400/22 – Decision not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list – Equal treatment – Principle of good administration – Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials – Stability of the composition of the selection board – Obligation to state reasons)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: administrator, aerospace industry, competition (EU), defence industry, engineer, equal treatment, recruitment








C_202600332EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/332


26.1.2026






Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – HH v Commission


(Case T-23/25)
                (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Recruitment - Notice of competition - Open competition EPSO/AD/400/22 - Decision not to include the applicant’s name on the reserve list - Equal treatment - Principle of good administration - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials - Stability of the composition of the selection board - Obligation to state reasons)
(C/2026/332)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: HH (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Biz and G. Niddam, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action, which he brings on the basis of Article 270 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the selection board in the open competition EPSO/AD/400/22 of 29 February 2024 by which it decided, upon review, not to include his name on the reserve list for the recruitment of administrators in grade AD 7 in the fields of the defence industry and space.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the appeal;










2.


Orders HH to pay the costs.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2025/1447, 10.3.2025.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/332/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-564/24: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Gürok v EUIPO – Olav (Lav) (EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU figurative mark Lav – Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Proof of genuine use – Assessment of the evidence – Unreasonable or excessive burden of proof – Principle of good administration – Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, ceramics, glass, household article, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202600324EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/324


26.1.2026






Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Gürok v EUIPO – Olav (Lav)


(Case T-564/24)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark Lav - Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Proof of genuine use - Assessment of the evidence - Unreasonable or excessive burden of proof - Principle of good administration - Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights)
(C/2026/324)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Gürok Turizm ve Madencilik AŞ (Kütahya, Türkiye) (represented by: J. Erdozain López, J. Vicente Martínez and M. López Camba, lawyers)

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: Olav GmbH (Cologne, Germany)

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 22 August 2024 (Case R 215/2024-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 August 2024 (Case R 215/2024-4);










2.


Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Gürok Turizm ve Madencilik AŞ.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2024/7378, 16.12.2024.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/324/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case C-738/25, Rodalmann: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 19 November 2025 – C SE v Finanzamt Z
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, double taxation, economic activity, establishment, international convention, public limited company, tax exemption, tax law, taxable income, taxpayer








C_202600300EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/300


26.1.2026






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 19 November 2025 – C SE v Finanzamt Z


(Case C-738/25, Rodalmann
                (1)
)

(C/2026/300)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant and appellant on a point of law: C SE

Defendant and respondent on a point of law: Finanzamt Z

Question referred

Is Article 43 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) (now Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)) to be interpreted as precluding a national rule such as that contained in Paragraph 20(2) of the Außensteuergesetz (Law on foreign transaction tax) (AStG), which, for the purposes of avoiding double taxation in connection with certain income from a foreign permanent establishment, unilaterally prescribes the set-off method rather than the exemption method applicable under the corresponding double taxation convention, without making it possible for the taxable person to prove that that person is actually established in the host Member State with the permanent establishment and carries on genuine economic activities there, whereas that possibility is available in the economically and fiscally comparable situation of a foreign company limited by shares?


(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/2026/300/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.12122 – COMPASS / VERMAAT)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, United Kingdom, United States, catering, catering industry, economic concentration, foodstuff, merger control, retail outlet, service industry








C_202506250EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/6250


19.11.2025






Prior notification of a concentration
(Case M.12122 – COMPASS / VERMAAT)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(C/2025/6250)


1.   
On 6 November 2025, 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:






—


Compass Group PLC (‘Compass’, UK),










—


Vincent Topco B.V., holding company of the Vermaat group of companies (‘Vermaat’, the Netherlands).




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


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






—


Compass provides outsourced contract and concession foodservices to customers in various sectors. It also provides certain ancillary support services such as facilities management and cleaning services, as well as food procurement services. It is active in the EU, US and the UK.










—


Vermaat provides outsourced contract and concession foodservices to customers in various sectors. Vermaat is primarily active in the Netherlands and, to a lesser extent, in France, Germany and Belgium. It also operates a limited number of convenience food stores under the names STACH, AH to go (under franchise) and La Place (as a joint venture) in the Netherlands.






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.



4.   
The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed concentration 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.12122 – COMPASS / VERMAAT
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’).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6250/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-3/25: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Zündapp v EUIPO – Longines (Representation of a stylised shield with horizontal bars) (EU trade mark–Opposition proceedings–Application for an EU figurative mark representing a stylised shield with horizontal bars–International registration of the earlier figurative mark representing two extended wings around a rectangle–Relative ground for refusal–No likelihood of confusion–Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001–Similarity of the signs at issue)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clock and watch industry, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202600331EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/331


26.1.2026






Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – Zündapp v EUIPO – Longines (Representation of a stylised shield with horizontal bars)


(Case T-3/25)
                (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a stylised shield with horizontal bars - International registration of the earlier figurative mark representing two extended wings around a rectangle - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Similarity of the signs at issue)
(C/2026/331)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Zündapp Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH (Zossen, Germany) (represented by: M. Müller, 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: Compagnie des Montres Longines, Francillon SA (Saint-Imier, Switzerland)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 October 2024 (Case R 262/2024-4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Zündapp Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbH and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) each to bear their own costs.






(1)  
            OJ C, C/2025/1443, 10.3.2025.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/331/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-796/25: Action brought on 19 November 2025 – Ionos v EUIPO – Kunze (IONOS)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, cement, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_202600349EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/349


26.1.2026






Action brought on 19 November 2025 – Ionos v EUIPO – Kunze (IONOS)


(Case T-796/25)

(C/2026/349)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: Ionos SE (Montabaur, Germany) (represented by: J. Wernicke, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Roland Kunze (Munich, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


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

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the mark IONOS – International registration designating the European Union No 1 068 493
         

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 September 2025 in Case R 2228/2024-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision;










—


order EUIPO to pay the costs.





Plea in law

Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/349/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
Case T-366/23: Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – YH v ECB (Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Directive 2013/36/EU – Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Specific supervisory tasks assigned to the ECB – Assessment of acquisitions of qualifying holdings – Opposition to the acquisition of a qualifying holding – Right to be heard – Concept of qualifying holding – Reputation and professional competence of the proposed acquirer – Rights protected by the Charter – Proportionality)
Date: 2025-11-19
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU banking union, banking supervision, financial supervision, principle of proportionality, rights of the defence, shareholder, shareholding








C_202600103EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/103


5.1.2026






Judgment of the General Court of 19 November 2025 – YH v ECB


(Case T-366/23)
                (1)

(Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Directive 2013/36/EU - Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 - Specific supervisory tasks assigned to the ECB - Assessment of acquisitions of qualifying holdings - Opposition to the acquisition of a qualifying holding - Right to be heard - Concept of ‘qualifying holding’ - Reputation and professional competence of the proposed acquirer - Rights protected by the Charter - Proportionality)
(C/2026/103)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: YH (represented by: J. Lehnhardt, R. Hübner and A. Walter, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: E. Yoo, R. Bax and V. Hümpfner, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) of 5 May 2023 opposing the acquisition by the applicant of a qualifying holding in M.M. Warburg & Co (AG & Co.) KGaA, M.M. Warburg & CO Hypothekenbank AG and Marcard, Stein & Co AG.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders YH to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Central Bank (ECB).






(1)  
            OJ C 321, 11.9.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/103/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)