Case T-124/01: Action brought on 1 June 2001 by Pietro del Vaglio against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2001-08-11
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, United Kingdom, action for annulment (EU), pension scheme, transfer of pension rights

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

C 227/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.8.2001

of the applicant, who lives with his partner and was therefore
unable to provide a lease or title deeds or telephone, gas or
electricity bills in his own name. The applicant further claims
infringement of the principle of proper administration, good
management and the duty to have regard to the welfare of
officials.

Action brought on 16 June 2001 by Euroalliages, Péchiney
Electrométallurgie, Vargon Alloys A.B. and Ferroatlantica
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-132/01)

(2001/C 227/61)

(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 16 June 2001 by Euroalliages,
whose registered office is in Brussels, Péchiney Electrométallur-
gie, whose registered office is in Courbevoie (France) Vargon
Alloys A.B., whose registered office is in Vargön (Sweden) and
Ferroatlantica, whose registered office is in Madrid, represented
by D Voillemot and Olivier Prost, Lawyers.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul the sole article of Commission Decision of 21 Feb-
ruary 2001 terminating the anti-dumping procedure
concerning imports of ferro-silicon originating in Brazil,
the People’s Republic of China, Kazakhstan, Russia,
Ukraine and Venezuela, with regard to those imports
originating in the People’s Republic of China, Russia,
Ukraine and Kazakhstan;

— order the European Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Since the applicant companies in the present case are part of
the Community ferro-silicon industry,
they object to the
Commission’s decision to terminate the anti-dumping pro-
cedure with regard to the importation of ferro-silicon originat-
ing in the People’s Republic of China, Kazakhstan, Russia and
Ukraine. That Decision is based on the consideration that the
maintenance of measures previously adopted against those
four countries would ‘clearly’ be contrary to the interests of
the Community. To arrive at this conclusion, the defendant
claims to have taken into account the period in which those
measures had been in place, assumed to have begun in 1987,

the fact that the Community market had failed to strengthen
or even maintain, its position on the market, and the fact that
Community steel producers had to bear negative effects, in the
form of additional costs brought by the measures in particular,
which cumulated while those measures were in force.

In this respect the applicant companies claim that a manifest
error of assessment has occurred. They dwell particularly on
the fact that the Commission could not call into question the
position adopted by the Council in 1993/1994 on Community
interest.

In support of their claims, they also submit that the following
provisions of the basic regulation on anti-dumping have been
infringed:

— Article 11(2) and Article 2 in so far as those provisions
prohibit the taking into account of a period prior to the
measures in force which are under review;

— Article 21(2) and (5) in that the Commission took into
account information submitted by users beyond the time
the review
limit set by the notice of
proceedings;

initiation of

— Article 21(5), in considering that the information submit-
ted by the users was representative. In that respect it can
the users who submitted information
be noted that
represented 10 % of Community consumption;

— Article 21(7) in so far as the Commission took into
information submitted by users which was

account
unsubstantiated by actual evidence;

— Article 6(6) as well as infringement of the right to a fair
hearing by refusing to organise a meeting with the users
to allow for exchange of views.

Removal from the register of Joined Cases T-137/99 and
T-18/00 (1)

(2001/C 227/62)

(Language of the case: French)

By order of 3 April 2001, the President of the Court of First
Instance of
the European Communities has ordered the
removal of the name of Athanasia Chrissanthaki from the list
of applicants in Joined Cases T-137/99 and T-18/00 Natalia
Martinez Pa´ramo and Others v Commission of the European
Communities.

(1) OJ C 246 of 28.8.99 and C 79 of 18.3.00.