Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 4 May 2017.Ralf Schräder v Community Plant Variety Office.Plant variety rights — Application for revocation of the Community protection of the plant variety rights granted to the variety SEIMORA — Application for a declaration of invalidity of the Community protection of the plant variety rights granted to the variety SEIMORA — Application for Community protection of plant variety rights for the variety SUMOST 02 — Composition of the Board of Appeal of CPVO — Principle of impartiality.Joined Cases T-425/15, T-426/15 and T-428/15.

Judgment // 04/05/2017 // 3 min read
bookmark

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 4 May 2017 —Schräder v OCVV — Hansson (SEIMORA)

(Joined Cases T‑425/15, T‑426/15 and T‑428/15)

(Plant variety rights — Application for revocation of the Community protection of the plant variety rights granted to the variety SEIMORA — Application for a declaration of invalidity of the Community protection of the plant variety rights granted to the variety SEIMORA — Application for Community protection of plant variety rights for the variety SUMOST 02 — Composition of the Board of Appeal of CPVO — Principle of impartiality)

  1. Agriculture — Uniform legislation — Protection of plant varieties — Appeals procedure — Appeal brought against a decision of the Community Plant Variety Office and referred to the Board of Appeal — Stay of proceedings — Conditions — Judicial review of a suspension decision — Limits

(Council Regulation No 2100/94, Art. 106)

(see paras 59, 60)

  1. Agriculture — Uniform legislation — Protection of plant varieties — Appeals procedure — Appeal brought against a decision of the Community Plant Variety Office and referred to the Board of Appeal — Obligation of board members suspected of partiality to refrain from sitting — Concept of partiality — Board expressing disagreement with the views of a party concerning the conduct of the procedure — Not included

(Council Regulation No 2100/94, Art. 48(3) and (4))

(see para. 67)

  1. Agriculture — Uniform legislation — Protection of plant varieties — Appeals procedure — Appeal brought against a decision of the Community Plant Variety Office and referred to the Board of Appeal — Measures of inquiry — Possibility of ordering additional investigative measures — Conditions

(Council Regulation No 2100/94, Arts 53 to 65)

(see paras 85-87)

  1. Actions for annulment — Grounds — Infringement of essential procedural requirements — Annulment capable of giving rise only to a new decision identical on the substance — Invalid plea in law

(Art. 263 TFEU)

(see para. 109)

  1. Agriculture — Uniform legislation — Protection of plant varieties — Transfer of rights to a protected variety — Conditions — Non-compliance — Consequences — Restrictive interpretation

(Council Regulation No 2100/94, Arts 23 and 26)

(see paras 137, 138)

Re:

In Case T‑425/15, action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of CVPO of 24 February 2015 (Case A 003/2010) concerning an application for revocation of the Community protection of the plant variety rights granted to the variety SEIMORA; in Case T‑426/15, action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of CVPO of 24 February 2015 (Case A 002/2014) concerning an application for a declaration of invalidity of the Community protection of the plant variety rights granted to the variety SEIMORA; and, in Case T‑428/15, action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of CVPO of 24 February 2015 (Case A 007/2009) concerning an application for Community protection of plant variety rights for the variety SUMOST 02.

Operative part

The Court:

  1. Dismisses the actions;

  2. Orders Mr Ralf Schräder to pay the costs.

Agriculture and Fisheries , Plant varieties