Case T-121/01: Action brought on 31 May 2001 by Laurent Piau against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-08-11
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, complaint to the Commission, infringement of EU law, sports body

C 227/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.8.2001

Action brought on 4 June 2001 by Carlo De Nicola against
the European Investment Bank

(Case T-120/01)

(2001/C 227/57)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the European Investment Bank was brought
before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 4 June 2001 by Carlo De Nicola, represented by Luigi Isola,
avvocato.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the letter of 6 March 2001 bearing reference

RH/Ress/2001-483/TP and its enclosure;

— annul the letter of 22 May 2001;

— annul Article 39 of the Staff Regulations;

— annul all acts connected with or ensuing from the
contested measures, or on which those measures are
based;

— rule and declare that the Code of Conduct is not applicable

to the applicant;

— order the European Investment Bank to pay compen-
sation for the physical, material and non-material damage
suffered,
in an amount to be determined during the
course of the proceedings;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the present case, the applicant — who is also the applicant
in Joined Cases T-7/98, T-208/98 and T-109/99 De Nicola v
European Investment Bank (EIB) — is contesting various
measures which he regards as having been adopted with a
view to obstructing compliance with the judgment delivered
on 23 February 2001 in the abovementioned cases (1).

Lastly, the applicant also pleads that Article 39 of the Staff
Regulations is illegal, inasmuch as it allows a person to be
relieved of his duties, and even provides for payment of that
person’s salary to be stopped, for up to three months, without
requiring the facts in issue to be communicated forthwith and
at the same time.

(1) OJ C 150 of 19.5.2001, p. 20.

Action brought on 31 May 2001 by Laurent Piau against
Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-121/01)

(2001/C 227/58)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 31 May 2001 by Laurent Piau,
residing in Nantes, France, represented by Marguerite Faucon-
net and Pierre Thielen, Avocats, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Declare that the Commission failed to adopt the necessary
measures within a reasonable time following the appli-
cant’s complaint on the basis of Article 3 of Regulation
No 17;

— Declare that the Commission is obliged to take the
necessary measures within one month against the party
complained against in the applicant’s complaint pursuant
to Regulation No 17;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

In support of his claims, the applicant pleads:

Pleas in law and main arguments

— infringement of the Staff Regulations and the Code of
Conduct,
if and in so far as the latter is applicable,
inasmuch as the letter of 6 March 2001 introduces a new
type of penalty which is not provided for. He claims, in
addition, that the enclosure to that letter lays down new
rules which are different from and contrary to those
provided for in the employment contract, in breach of
the Charter of Human Rights and the principles of proper
conduct and contractual good faith.

— failure, as regards the letter from the President of the EIB
— which suspended the applicant from all duties with
immediate effect and prohibited him from entering his
office — to comply with the obligation to communicate
in advance the facts in issue.

The applicant states that on 23 March 1998 he lodged a
complaint with the Commission of the European Communi-
ties, arguing that the rules applied by Fédération International
de Football Association (FIFA) to the activity of player’s agent
were contrary to Community law, in particular Articles 49 EC
and 81 EC (COMP/37.124 Piau/FIFA). The Commission made
a thorough investigation and on 19 October 1999 sent FIFA a
statement of complaints. On 24 February 2000 the parties
presented their views orally. On 31 January 2001 the applicant,
since he had not received any statement of position, called on
the Commission to respond. To this day, almost three years
after the complaint was made, the Commission has not taken
a clear, explicit position on the problem submitted to it by the
applicant.

11.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 227/31

The applicant considers that the Commission’s inaction is
contrary to the Treaty and to Regulation No 17, since it is
allowing an infringement of Article 81(1) of the Treaty to
continue, although it has all the evidence available to adopt
the necessary measures.

— Infringement of Article 7(1)(b)
of Regulation No 40/94;
— Failure to take account of the
services actually being offered;
— Failure to take account of the
existing registrations of
the
sign in Germany and France.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

Action brought on 4 June 2001 by Best Buy Concepts Inc.
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-122/01)

(2001/C 227/59)

(Language of the case: German)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
4 June 2001 by Best Buy Concepts Inc., Minnesota (U.S.A.),
represented by Sabine Rojahn, Rechtsanwältin, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— set aside the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of
21 March 2001 in Case R 44/2000-3;

— order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Trade mark for which
Community registration
sought:

Goods or services:

The pictorial mark ‘BEST BUY’ —
Application No 001166164

Services in Classes 35, 37 and 42
con-
(including management
sultancy, installation of car stereo
systems and products for the pri-
vate office, and specialist advice
on the fitting-out of retail busi-
nesses)

Action brought on 1 June 2001 by Pietro del Vaglio
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-124/01)

(2001/C 227/60)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 1 June 2001 by Pietro del Vaglio
domiciled in London, represented by Georges Vandersanden,
Laure Levi and Dugois Dominique, Lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul

the Commission’s Decision of 5 April 2000
refusing to apply the United Kingdom weighting to the
applicant’s pension as from 8 May 1999 and, so far as
necessary, annul the decision of the Commission of
23 February 2001 dismissing the applicant’s claim of
18 July 2000;

— Order the defendant

to apply the United Kingdom

weighting with retroactive effect from 8 May 1999;

— Order the defendant to pay damage provisionally assessed
ex aequo et bono at 10 000 Euros and to pay interest at
8 % per annum on the remainder of the pension owed as
from 8 May 1999;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Decision disputed before
the Board of Appeal:

Refusal of
examiner

registration by the

Pleas in law:

— Infringement of Article 7(1)(c)
of Regulation No 40/94 (1);

The applicant claims infringement of Article 82 of the Staff
Regulations. The applicant claims that the Commission did
not properly evaluate the documentation he provided to prove
his change of country of residence. The Commission should,
inter alia, have taken into consideration the particular situation