- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-140/15: Judgment of the General Court of 23 November 2017 — Aurora v CPVO — SESVanderhave (M 02205) (Plant varieties — Nullity proceedings — Sugar beet variety M 02205 — Article 20(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 — Article 7 of Regulation No 2100/94 — Distinctness of the candidate variety — Technical examination — Procedure before the Board of Appeal — Obligation to analyse carefully and impartially all the elements relevant to the present case — Power to alter)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015TA0140
62015TA0140
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 13/12
(Case T-140/15) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Plant varieties - Nullity proceedings - Sugar beet variety M 02205 - Article 20(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 - Article 7 of Regulation No 2100/94 - Distinctness of the candidate variety - Technical examination - Procedure before the Board of Appeal - Obligation to analyse carefully and impartially all the elements relevant to the present case - Power to alter))
(2018/C 013/20)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Aurora Srl (Finale Emilia, Italy) (represented: initially by L.-B. Buchman, lawyer, and subsequently by L.-B. Buchman, R. Crespi and M. Razou, lawyers)
Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) (represented: initially by F. Mattina, subsequently by M. Mattina and M. Ekvad, and finally by M. Mattina, M. Ekvad and A. Weitz, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the CPVO, intervener before the Court: SESVanderhave NV (Tirlemont, Belgium) (represented: initially by K. Neefs and P. de Jong and subsequently by P. de Jong, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of the CPVO of 26 November 2014 (Case A 010/2013) concerning nullity proceedings between Aurora and SESVanderhave.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) of 26 November 2014 (Case A 010/2013);
2.Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.Orders the CPVO to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Aurora Srl;
4.Orders SESVanderhave NV to bear its own costs.
(<span class="note">1</span>) OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.