# C_2008142EN.01003201.xml

| 7.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/32

---

Action brought on 4 April 2008 — Schräder v CPVO — Jørn Hansson (Lemon Symphony)

(Case T-134/08)

(2008/C 142/58)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Ralf Schräder (Lüdinghausen, Germany) (represented by: T. Leidereiter and W.-A. Schmidt, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of CPVO: Jørn Hansson (Søndersø, Denmark)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of CPVO:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of CPVO of 4 December 2007 (Case A 006/2007); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Board of Appeal of CPVO of 4 December 2007 (Case A 006/2007);

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community plant variety right concerned: Lemon Symphony

Community plant variety right concerned:

Proprietor of the Community plant variety right: Jørn Hansson

Proprietor of the Community plant variety right:

Decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office which is being contested: Failure to cancel the Community plant variety right for Lemon Symphony in accordance with Article 21 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 (1)

Decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office which is being contested:

1

Appellant before the Board of Appeal: the Applicant

Appellant before the Board of Appeal:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 59(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1239/95 (2) inasmuch as the applicant was not summoned to the hearing in due form; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 59(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1239/95 (2) inasmuch as the applicant was not summoned to the hearing in due form;

2

| — | Infringement of Article 71(1), in conjunction with Articles 21, 67 and 68, of Regulation No 2100/94 inasmuch as the grounds of appeal were not considered or not adequately considered; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 71(1), in conjunction with Articles 21, 67 and 68, of Regulation No 2100/94 inasmuch as the grounds of appeal were not considered or not adequately considered;

| — | Infringement of Article 73 of Regulation No 2100/94 and Article 230 EC inasmuch as the applicant's right to judicial review of administrative action has been infringed; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 73 of Regulation No 2100/94 and Article 230 EC inasmuch as the applicant's right to judicial review of administrative action has been infringed;

| — | Infringement of Article 48 of Regulation No 2100/94 inasmuch as a member of the Board of Appeal allegedly had an interest in the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 48 of Regulation No 2100/94 inasmuch as a member of the Board of Appeal allegedly had an interest in the proceedings.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights (OJ 1994 L 227, p. 1).

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1239/95 of 31 May 1995 establishing implementing rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 as regards proceedings before the Community Plant Variety Office (OJ 1995 L 121, p. 37).

2

---