Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 November 2001 in Case T-349/00: Giorgio Lebedef v Commission of the European Communities (Officials — 1974 framework agreement between the Commission and the trade unions/staff associations — Revision or modification — Consultation procedure — Introduction of new modalities — Admissibility)
Date: 2002-02-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), civil servants’ union, equal treatment, political discrimination

C 31/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

2.2.2002

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 18 October 2001

in Case T-333/99: X v European Central Bank (1)

(Officials — Servants of the European Central Bank —
Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance — Legality of
conditions of employment — Rights of the defence —
Dismissal — Harassment — Misuse of the internet)

lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: A. von Mühlendahl, D. Schen-
nen and S. Laitinen) — application brought against
the
decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and
Designs) of 21 September 1999 (Case R 71/1999-3), which
was notified to the applicant on 28 September 1999 — the
Court of First
Instance (Second Chamber), composed of
A. W. H. Meij, President, A. Potocki and J. Pirrung, Judges;
D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 19 September 2001, in which it:

(2002/C 31/14)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-333/99: X, residing in Frankfurt am Main (Germany),
represented by N. Pflüger, R. Steiner and S. Mittländer, lawyers,
with an address for service in Luxembourg, against European
Central Bank (Agents: C. Zilioli and V. Saintot and B. Wägen-
baur) — application for annulment of the decision of the
Executive Board of the European Central Bank of 9 November
1999 to continue the suspension of the applicant and to
withhold one half of his basic salary, and of the decision of
18 November 1999 dismissing the applicant — the Court of
First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of J. Azizi, President,
K. Lenaerts and M. Jaeger, Judges; D. Christensen, Adminis-
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 October
2001, in which it:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 79 of 18.3.00.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 19 September 2001

in Case T-336/99: Henkel KGaA v Office for Harmonis-
ation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — Shape of a product for washing
machines or dishwashers — Three-dimensional mark —
Absolute ground for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94)

(2002/C 31/15)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-336/99: Henkel KGaA, established in Düsseldorf
(Germany), represented by H.F. Wissel and C. Osterrieth,

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 63 of 4.3.00.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 15 November 2001

in Case T-349/00: Giorgio Lebedef v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Officials — 1974 framework agreement between the Com-
mission and the trade unions/staff associations — Revision
or modification — Consultation procedure — Introduction
of new modalities — Admissibility)

(2002/C 31/16)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-349/00: Giorgio Lebedef, an official of the Com-
mission of the European Communities, residing at Senninger-
berg (Luxembourg), represented by G. Bounéou and F. Frabetti,
avocats, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v Com-
mission of the European Communities (Agents: G. Valsesia
and J. Currall) — application for annulment of the ‘Operational
Rules on the consultation levels, the consultation body and
related procedures’ agreed between the Commission and the
majority of the trade unions/staff associations on 19 January
2000 or, alternatively, of the composition of the consultation
body as provided for by those rules in so far as it excludes the
trade union ‘Action & Défense’ from that body — the Court of
First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of: P. Mengozzi,
Judges;
President, and V. Tiili and R. M. Moura Ramos,
J. Plingers, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 15 November 2001, in which it:

2.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 31/9

1. Annuls the ‘Operational Rules on the consultation levels, the
consultation body and related procedures’ agreed between
the Commission and the majority of the trade unions/staff
associations on 19 January 2000, in so far as they exclude the
trade union ‘Action & Défense’ from the consultation body;

2. Orders the Commission to pay all the costs.

(1) OJ C 61 of 24.2.2001.

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 19 September 2001

in Case T-332/99: Paul Jestädt v Council of the European
Union and Commission of the European Communities (1)

(Action for damages — Non-contractual liability — Milk —
Additional levy — Reference quantity — Regulation (EC)
No 2330/98 — Compensation for producers — Limitation
— Action manifestly inadmissible)

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(2002/C 31/18)

of 15 November 2001

(Language of the case: German)

in Joined Cases T-83/99 and T-84/99 DEP: Carlo Ripa di
Meana and Leoluca Orlando v European Parliament (1)

(Taxation of costs)

(2002/C 31/17)

(Language of the case: Italian)

In Joined Cases T-83/99 and T-84/99 DEP: Carlo Ripa di
Meana, former Italian Member of the European Parliament,
residing in Montecastello di Vibio (Italy), Leoluca Orlando,
former Italian Member of the European Parliament, residing in
Palermo (Italy), represented by W. Viscardini Donà, assisted by
G. Donà, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
against European Parliament (Agents: A. Caiola and G. Ricci)
—application for taxation of costs to be paid by the defendant
to the applicants in compliance with the judgment of the
Court of 26 October 2000 in Joined Cases T-83/99 to T-85/99
Ripa di Meana and Others v Parliament [2000] ECR II-3493
— the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of
M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and P. Lindh, Judges; H. Jung,
Registrar, made an order on 15 November 2001, the operative
part of which is as follows:

The total amount of costs to be paid by the European Parliament to
the applicants is fixed at ITL 40 000 000.

Jestädt, residing in Großenlüder
In Case T-332/99: Paul
(Germany), represented by R.J. Seimetz, lawyer, with an address
for service Luxembourg, against Council of the European
Union (Agent: A.-M. Colaert) and Commission of the European
Communities (Agent: M. Niejahr) — application for compen-
sation under Article 235 and the second paragraph of
Article 288 EC, for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant
by reason of being prevented from marketing milk pursuant
Council Regulation (EC) No 857/84 of 31 March 1984
adopting general rules for the application of the levy referred
to in Article 5c of Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 in the
milk and milk products sector (OJ 1984 L 90, p. 13), as
supplemented by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1371/84
of 16 May 1984 laying down detailed rules for the application
of the additional levy referred to in Article 5c of Regulation
(EEC) No 804/68 (OJ L 132, p. 11) — the Court of
First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of P. Mengozzi,
President, V. Tiili and R.M. Moura Ramos, Judges; H. Jung,
Registrar, made an order on 19 September 2001, the operative
part of which is as follows:

1.

2.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

The applicant shall bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 160 of 5.6.1999.

(1) OJ C 63, 4.3.2000.