Case T-235/02: Action brought on 5 August 2002 by Strongline A/S against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Date: 2002-09-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), recording medium, software, trade-mark law

28.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 233/33

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants, being the President of AIFO (Associazione
Italiana Frantoiani Oleari) and that association itself, seek
annulment of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1019/2002 of
13 June 2002 on marketing standards for olive oil (1).

their claims,

In support of
they plead infringement of
Article 33, the second subparagraph of Article 34(2) and
Articles 153, 157 and 253 of the EC Treaty. They maintain
the contested regulation favours the
in that regard that
maintenance of the dominant positions occupied by large
undertakings in the sector concerned, thereby impeding the
development of small and medium-sized undertakings, and
that it does not provide consumers with guarantees as to the
provenance and authenticity of the product. In particular, the
regulation provides that the labelling is to bear information on
the category of olive oil concerned, but that information is
inadequate to guarantee the intrinsic quality of the product.
More specifically, it provides that the designation of origin of
virgin and extra virgin olive oils is to be purely optional,
whereas, for consumers, the geographical origin of the raw
materials is invariably a point of major importance. The
regulation requires the product to be presented to the final
consumer in packaging of a maximum capacity of five litres,
to the prejudice of small operators such as pressers, who
generally sell the product in bulk on the spot.

Moreover, the contested regulation does not provide adequate
guarantees as to the provenance and authenticity of the
product, thus impeding the marketing of types of oil which
are of higher quality and are more susceptible to direct control
by the consumer, such as that sold directly by the presser.

From another standpoint, and contrary to the objective of
the common agricultural policy,
the contested regulation
discourages the distribution of high-quality olive oil such as
that marketed directly by pressers, and acts as a disincentive
to productivity, technical progress and rational agricultural
development.

( 1) OJ L 155 of 14.6.2002, p. 27.

Action brought on 2 August 2002 by Kharis Alexandratos
and Maria Panagiotou against the Council of the European
Union

(Case T-233/02)

(2002/C 233/58)

(Language of the Case: Greek)

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European

Communities on 2 August 2002 by Kharis Alexandratos
and Maria Panagiotou, resident in Brussels, represented by
K. Tagaras, Lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— allow the application;

— annul the contested measures so that the defendant is
obliged to allow the applicants to sit the oral tests;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This is an action challenging the decision of the selection
board for Council Open Competition A/393 to award the
applicants a fail mark in one of the written tests and not to
allow them to sit the oral tests.

The applicants plead infringement of the first paragraph of
Article 27 of the Staff Regulations and of the principle of equal
treatment. They contend that the infringement is aggravated
by the defendant’s refusal to grant requests made by them
seeking information concerning the guidelines and criteria for
marking their papers and comparing them with those of the
successful candidates.

Furthermore, in the applicants’ submission that refusal renders
the contested measures liable to annulment also by reason of
breach of the duty to state reasons for measures adversely
affecting them and of the principle of transparency in conjunc-
tion with Article 255 EC concerning access to documents.

Action brought on 5 August 2002 by Strongline A/S
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

(Case T-235/02)

(2002/C 233/59)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 August 2002 by Strongline A/S,
represented by Mr Jacob S. Ørndrup at Gorrissen, Federspiel,
Kierkegaard in Copenhagen, Denmark.

C 233/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

28.9.2002

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the First Board of Appeal’s decision of 27 May

2002 in Case R 830/2001-1;

— remit the case to the First Board of Appeal;

— order each party to bear its own costs.

— Registration of the Scala Inc’s
Community
trade mark
application is an infringe-
ment of Article 8(1) of
Council Regulation No 40/
94, as the applicant is the
owner of
two earlier and
identical trade marks which
are registered for identical or
similar goods.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

Scala Inc., USA

Action brought on 8 August 2002 by Luigi Marcuccio
against the Commission of the European Communities

The Community trade Word mark SCALA for ‘computer
mark concerned:

software’ in class 9.

(Case T-236/02)

(2002/C 233/60)

The Applicant

(Language of the case: Italian)

Proprietor to the right to
the trade mark or sign
asserted by way of oppo-
sition in the opposition
proceedings:

registered

Danish trade mark registration no.
Trade mark or
sign
asserted by way of oppo-
VR 1300 1989 SCALA (word
sition in the opposition mark), registered on 17 March
1989, and German trade mark
proceedings:
registration no. 2059843 SCALA
(Word mark),
on
15 March 1994. These two marks
are registered for a range of goods
in classes 9 and 16. The appli-
cant’s opposition was based on
some of
the goods for which
the earlier mark was registered,
specifically ‘counterprograms sto-
red on datacarriers’ and ‘date pro-
cessing programs stored on data
carriers’ in class 9, and was direct-
ed against all the goods specified
in Scala Inc’s application

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Refusal of he application

Grounds of claim:

— The documents submitted by
the Applicant to the Oppo-
sition Division did comply
with Rule 16(2) of Regu-
lation (EC) No. 2868/95,
implementing Council Regu-
lation No 40/94, on the
Community Trade Mark

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 8 August 2002 by Luigi Marcuccio,
represented by Luciano Garofalo, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision changing the ‘affectation de l’emploi
A7/A6 et de son titulaire M. Luigi Marcuccio (n. Personnel
048092), fonctionnaire de grade A7’ (‘transferring the
A6/A7 post and its holder, Mr Luigi Marcuccio (Staff
No 048092), a grade A7 official’) from the Directorate-
General for Development, Commission’s Delegation in
Luanda (Angola) to the Directorate-General for Develop-
ment in Brussels; the said decision was adopted by the
Director-General for Development, Mr Koos Richelle, on
18 March 2002;

— order the defendant:

— to pay compensation for the non-material, existen-
tial, biological, physical, psychological and material
damage suffered by the applicant as a result of the
decision contested in these proceedings, in the sum
of 100 000 (one hundred thousand) euros or such
greater or lesser sum as the Court may think fair and
equitable;

— to pay all the salary-related allowances connected
with the performance by the said Marcuccio of his
duties in Angola, with effect from the date on which
his transfer took effect (1 April 2002), together with
interest thereon at the rate of 10 % per annum,
compounded annually;

— to pay the costs.