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
Language of the case: English
Appellant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: N. Bambara, acting as Agent, and by P. Wytinck and B. Hoorelbeke, lawyers)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by: M. Sfyri, C.-N. Dede and V. Alevizopoulou, dikigoroi)
The Court:
1.Sets aside points 2 to 5 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 27 April 2016, European Dynamics Luxembourg and Others v EUIPO (T-556/11, EU:T:2016:248);
2.Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;
3.Dismisses the claim for damages brought by European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE in Case T-556/11;
4.Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), European Dynamics Luxembourg SA, European Dynamics Belgium SA and Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE to bear their own costs in relation to both the appeal proceedings and the proceedings at first instance.
*
(*1) OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.