Case T-247/01: Action brought on 26 September 2001 by eCopy, Inc. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Date: 2002-01-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU)

19.1.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 17/17

of payment of this fine were specified in Article 4 of the
Decision. Fines and sanctions subsequent to these infringe-
ments have been imposed upon the applicant in other states.

under its principal credit facilities, its ability to pay and the
effect on competition in the graphite electrodes market if the
applicant were forced into bankruptcy.

(1) Commission Notice of 18 July 1996 on the non-imposition or

reduction of fines in cartel cases (OJ [1996] C 207, p. 4).

The Decision was sent to the applicant by letter dated 23 July
2001 from the Commissioner responsible for competition
matters, in which further matters regarding payment, including
statements about a possible collection of the fine in case of
non-payment, were mentioned. The applicant submits that
this letter constitutes a separate decision which it contests.

Action brought on 26 September 2001 by eCopy, Inc.
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

The applicant made representations to the Commission on the
subject of payment terms. The Commission replied by letter of
9 August 2001 which, according to the applicant, constitutes
a third distinct decision, of which it seeks the annulment.

(Case T-247/01)

(2002/C 17/29)

(Language of the case: English)

The applicant does not contest the findings in the first Decision
that it committed an infringement of the EC competition rules,
nor does it contest that a fine should be imposed for this
infringement. It does, however, contest the imposition of a
fine on it in the above-mentioned amount. It alleges that it
should have been accorded a greater reduction of the fine for
its cooperation with the Commission under the Leniency
Notice (1), and that the level of the fine is unlawfully high,
having regard to the gravity and duration of the infringement,
and to aggravating and attenuating circumstances and other
general factors. The Commission has also breached certain
essential procedural requirements in failing properly to investi-
gate and assess the role of the former owners of the applicant
in the cartel.

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 26 September 2001 by eCopy,
Inc., represented by Mr Brian C. Read, Barrister, of 19 Old
Buildings, London (United Kingdom)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Board Decision of 13 July 2001;

— order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
to grant Community trade application no. 1718667,
alternatively to continue prosecution of the application
according to the judgment of the Court;

— order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

to pay the costs of eCopy, Inc.

Furthermore, the applicant contests the associated payment
terms and grounds and submits that Article 4 of the Decision
of 18 July 2001 and the alleged third decision of 9 August
2001 are void for the lack of reasoning. The applicant disputes
the Commission’s position that it will seek to enforce the fine,
even if proceedings for its annulment are pending before the
Court, unless a bank guarantee covering the amount of the
fine and interest is provided. It is submitted that the Com-
mission erred when it refused to accept a lien on company
assets as security for the fine and when it refused to accept or
even consider a payment schedule which did not include a
bank guarantee. Finally, the Commission erroneously refused
to take account of the restrictions imposed on the applicant

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

eCopy, Inc.

The Community trade
mark concerned:

The verbal mark ECOPY in respect
of certain goods in class 9.

Decision of the Exam-
iner:

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Refusal of the application

Rejection of the Appeal

C 17/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19.1.2002

Grounds of claim:

interpretation

Incorrect
of
Article 7 of Regulation 40/94 (1)
and unjust refusal of evidence
filed by the Applicant after the
filing of the Application.

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

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

Action brought on 10 October 2001 by Norman Pyres
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-256/01)

(2002/C 17/30)

(Language of the case: French)

In support of his claims, the applicant relies on the following
pleas:

— infringement of Article 1(1) of Annex III to the Staff
Regulations and of Article 12 of the Conditions of
Employment of Other Servants of the European Com-
munities.

— disregard for the interests of the service.

— the existence, in the present case, of a manifest error of

assessment.

— breach of the principle of non-discrimination.

The applicant states in that regard that it is for the institution
to justify on objective grounds the condition relating to age
which it sets in its recruitment notices, such justification to be
objective and reasonable, to be in pursuit of a legitimate
interest and to observe the requirements of proportionality.

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 10 October 2001 by Noramn
Pyres, residing in Brussels, represented by Georges Vandersan-
den and Laure Levi, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of 1 December 2000 of the Selection
Board in competition COM/R/A/14/2000, the decision of
4 December 2000 of the Selection Board in competition
COM/R/A/10/2000 and the decision of 7 December 2000
of the Selection Board in competition COM/R/A/07/2000
refusing to allow the applicant to take part in the selection
procedure;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 16 October 2001 by Nutrinveste —
Comércio Internacional, S.A. against Commission of the
European Communities

(Case T-259/01)

(2002/C 17/31)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First
Instance on
16 October 2001 by Nutrinveste — Comércio Internacional,
S.A., established in Algés, Portugal, represented by the lawyers
Jorge Monteiro dos Santos, Ana Cristina Vasconcelos, Jorge de
Mendia, Sandra Sousa de Almeida and Anto´ nio Texeira de
Almeida, of Lisbon.

The applicant opposes the decision of the appointing authority
to exclude him from the selection procedure for COM/
R/A/07/2000, COM/R/A/10/2000 and COM/R/A/14/2000,
organised by the Research Directorate General, on the ground
that he did not meet the condition as to age-limit prescribed
therein.

The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:

— Order the European Commission to pay to the applicant
the sum of EUR 61 222 for goods duly delivered but not
yet paid for.