Документы: Европейский Союз

39221

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#'Konservinvest' OOD v 'Bulkons Parvomay' OOD.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgarie).#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs – Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 – Designations of Origin and Geographical indications – Article 9 – Transitional national protection – Geographical indication designating an agricultural product, registered under the legislation of a Member State and protected at national level.#Case C-35/21.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39222

Case C-35/21: Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 9 February 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad — Bulgaria) — ‘Konservinvest’ OOD v ‘Bulkons Parvomay’ OOD (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs — Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 — Designations of Origin and Geographical indications — Article 9 — Transitional national protection — Geographical indication designating an agricultural product, registered under the legislation of a Member State and protected at national level)

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39223

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Calzaturificio Emmegiemme Shoes Srl v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark MAIMAI MADE IN ITALY – Earlier EU word mark YAMAMAY – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Admissibility of new evidence – Alteration of the distinctive character.#Case T-589/20.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39224

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Calzaturificio Emmegiemme Shoes Srl v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark MAIMAI MADE IN ITALY – Earlier EU word mark YAMAMAY – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Admissibility of new evidence – Alteration of the distinctive character.#Case T-589/20.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39225

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Ivo Van Walle v European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.#Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – ECDC staff members – Appraisal report for 2018 – Freedom of expression – Obligation to state reasons – Case requiring a specific statement of reasons – Manifest error of assessment – Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials – Right to be heard.#Case T-33/20.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39226

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Ivo Van Walle v European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.#Civil service – Members of the temporary staff – ECDC staff members – Appraisal report for 2018 – Freedom of expression – Obligation to state reasons – Case requiring a specific statement of reasons – Manifest error of assessment – Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials – Right to be heard.#Case T-33/20.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39227

Case T-589/20: Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — Calzaturificio Emmegiemme Shoes v EUIPO — Inticom (MAIMAI MADE IN ITALY) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark MAIMAI MADE IN ITALY — Earlier EU word mark YAMAMAY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Admissibility of new evidence — Alteration of the distinctive character)

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39228

Case T-33/20: Judgment of the General Court of 9 February 2022 — Van Walle v ECDC (Civil service — Members of the temporary staff — ECDC staff members — Appraisal report for 2018 — Freedom of expression — Obligation to state reasons — Case requiring a specific statement of reasons — Manifest error of assessment — Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials — Right to be heard)

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39229

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 9 February 2022.#Sped-Pro S.A. v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Market for rail freight transport services – Decision rejecting a complaint – Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 – Reasonable time – EU interest in pursuing the examination of a complaint – Determination of the authority that is best placed to examine a complaint – Criteria – Manifest error of assessment – Systemic or generalised deficiencies as regards respect for the rule of law – Risk of a breach of a complainant’s rights where a complaint is rejected – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-791/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39230

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 9 February 2022.#Sped-Pro S.A. v European Commission.#Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Market for rail freight transport services – Decision rejecting a complaint – Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 – Reasonable time – EU interest in pursuing the examination of a complaint – Determination of the authority that is best placed to examine a complaint – Criteria – Manifest error of assessment – Systemic or generalised deficiencies as regards respect for the rule of law – Risk of a breach of a complainant’s rights where a complaint is rejected – Obligation to state reasons.#Case T-791/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39231

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Companhia de Seguros Índico SA v European Commission.#Public procurement – Financial Regulation – Exclusion from procurement procedures and from the award of grants financed by the general EU budget and by the EDF for a three-year period – Principle of good faith – Abuse of rights – Manifest error of assessment – Proportionality.#Case T-672/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39232

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Companhia de Seguros Índico SA v European Commission.#Public procurement – Financial Regulation – Exclusion from procurement procedures and from the award of grants financed by the general EU budget and by the EDF for a three-year period – Principle of good faith – Abuse of rights – Manifest error of assessment – Proportionality.#Case T-672/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39233

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Elevolution - Engenharia, SA v European Commission.#Public procurement – Financial Regulation – Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the EDF for a three-year period – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of sound administration – Right to be heard – Manifest error of assessment – Proportionality.#Case T-652/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39234

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Elevolution - Engenharia, SA v European Commission.#Public procurement – Financial Regulation – Exclusion from procurement and grant award procedures covered by the EDF for a three-year period – Obligation to state reasons – Principle of sound administration – Right to be heard – Manifest error of assessment – Proportionality.#Case T-652/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39235

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Heitec AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark HEITEC – No account taken of evidence submitted before the Cancellation Division and before the Board of Appeal – Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – No genuine use of the trade mark – Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Rule 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 19(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625).#Case T-520/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39236

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#Heitec AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office.#EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark HEITEC – No account taken of evidence submitted before the Cancellation Division and before the Board of Appeal – Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – No genuine use of the trade mark – Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Rule 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 19(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625).#Case T-520/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39237

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#AMVAC Netherlands BV v European Commission.#Plant protection products – Active substance ethoprophos – Non-renewal of approval – Regulation No 1107/2009 and Implementing Regulation No 844/2012 – Rights of the defence – Manifest error of assessment – Legal certainty – Proportionality – Precautionary principle.#Case T-317/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39238

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#AMVAC Netherlands BV v European Commission.#Plant protection products – Active substance ethoprophos – Non-renewal of approval – Regulation No 1107/2009 and Implementing Regulation No 844/2012 – Rights of the defence – Manifest error of assessment – Legal certainty – Proportionality – Precautionary principle.#Case T-317/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39239

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#GEA Group AG v European Commission.#Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – European markets in tin stabilisers and in ESBO/esters heat stabilisers – Decision establishing an infringement of Article 81 EC – Decision amending the initial decision annulled – Decision rejecting a request for repayment of the fine – Action for annulment – Actionable measure – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility – Article 266(1) TFEU.#Case T-195/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.

39240

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 February 2022.#GEA Group AG v European Commission.#Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – European markets in tin stabilisers and in ESBO/esters heat stabilisers – Decision establishing an infringement of Article 81 EC – Decision amending the initial decision annulled – Decision rejecting a request for repayment of the fine – Action for annulment – Actionable measure – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility – Article 266(1) TFEU.#Case T-195/19.

cjeu_case · 9 февраля 2022 г.