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
Applicant: Confédération européenne des associations d’horlogers-réparateurs (CEAHR) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented: initially by P. Mathijsen and P. Dyrberg, subsequently by M. Sánchez Rydelski and lastly by P. Benczek, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by F. Ronkes Agerbeek, M. Farley and C. Urraca Caviedes, and subsequently by A. Dawes, F. Ronkes Agerbeek and J. Norris-Usher, acting as Agents)
Interveners in support of the defendant: LVMH Moët Hennessy-Louis Vuitton SA (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Froitzheim, lawyer, and R. Subiotto QC), Rolex, SA (Geneva, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Araujo Boyd, lawyer) and The Swatch Group SA (Neuchâtel, Switzerland) (represented: initially by A. Israel and M. Jakobs, and subsequently by A. Israel and J. Lang, lawyers)
Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 5462 final of 29 July 2014, by which the Commission rejected the complaint lodged by the applicant concerning alleged infringements of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (Case AT.39097 — Watch Repair).
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders the Confédération européenne des associations d’horlogers-réparateurs (CEAHR) to pay the costs.
* Language of the case: English.
(1) OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.