Case T-242/02: Action brought on 14 August 2002 by Sunrider Corporation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Date: 2002-10-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), aromatic plant

C 261/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

26.10.2002

Article 86(2)(f) of the Staff Regulations for officials of the
European Communities — the President of the Court of First
Instance has made an order on 14 August 2002, in which he:

Action brought on 29 June 2002 by José Lloris Maeso
against Commission of the European Communities

1. Dismisses the application for interim measures;

2. Orders that costs are reserved.

(Case T-165/02)

(2002/C 261/31)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 29 June 2002 by José Lloris Maeso,
residing in Valencia (Spain), represented by Julián Bosch
Abarca, lawyers.

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST
INSTANCE

The applicant claims that the Court should:

of 16 July 2002

— annul the decision of the selection board for competition
COM/A/10/01 (Law) of 2 May 2002, and that he be
admitted to the next stage of that competition.

in Case T-207/02 R: Nicoletta Falcone v Commission of
the European Communities

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Procedure for interim relief — Competition procedure —
Interim measures — Urgency — None)

(2002/C 261/30)

(Language of the case: Italian)

The applicant in the present case is challenging the decision of
the selection board for COM/A/10/01 (Law), notified by letter
dated 2 May 2002, awarding him in respect of one of the
selection tests in that competition, specifically test (a), marks
below the minimum required to be admitted to the remainder
of the tests for that competition.

In support of his claim, the applicant alleges error in the
marking of the abovementioned test (a).

In Case T-207/02 R: Nicoletta Falcone, residing in Florence
(Italy), represented by M. Condinanzi, lawyer, against Com-
mission of the European Communities (Agents: J. Currall and
A. Dal Ferro) — application for an interim measure requiring
to complete her
the Commission to invite the applicant
application for admission to the second set of tests in general
competition COM/A/10/01,
in the field of law, fixed for
19 July 2002, from which she was excluded by decision of the
jury of 2 May 2002 informing her that she had not been
admitted to the written tests in the said competition — the
President of the Court of First Instance has made an order on
16 July 2002, in which he:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders that costs are reserved.

Action brought on 14 August 2002 by Sunrider Corpor-
ation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

(Case T-242/02)

(2002/C 261/32)

(Language of the case: Greek)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 14 August 2002 by Sunrider
Corporation, whose registered office is in Torrance, California
(USA), represented by Nikolaos Dontas and Maria Bra, Lawyers,
with an address for service in Luxembourg.

26.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261/17

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— allow the present action;

— annul the contested decision of the First Board of Appeal
of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 May 2002; and

— order the Office in any event to pay, first, the applicant’s
costs both before the Board of Appeal and before the
Court of First Instance, together with the fees of the
lawyers instructed by it, and second, the translation
costs incurred by the applicant in the procedures for
examination of its application and consideration of its
appeal before the Board of Appeal.

Action brought on 19 August 2002 by Antonia de Jong
against Europol

(Case T-245/02)

(2002/C 261/33)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

An action against Europol was brought before the Court of
First Instance of the European Communities on 19 August
2002 by Antonia de Jong, residing in The Hague (Netherlands),
represented by Pauline de Casparis and Maria Franciscus
Baltussen.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark:

the word mark ‘TOP’ — Appli-
cation 604 975

Goods or services con-
cerned:

herbal food capsule or powder;
herbal nutritional
supplement.
(Classes 5 and 29)

Decision of
iner:

the exam-

refusal of the application for regis-
tration

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

dismissal of the appeal

Grounds put forward:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

the audi
infringement of
alteram partem rule and of the
rights of the defence

long

impermissibly
pro-
cedure before the Office’s
Boards of Appeal from the
lodging of the appeal to noti-
fication of the decision to the
applicant

non-notification of matters
upon which the contested
decision was based

insufficient
grounds of
decision

unclear
and
the contested

suitability for registration of
the mark

distinctive character of the
mark

1.

2.

Set aside Europol’s rejection of the applicant’s complaint
brought against the Decision of 23 November 2001 and
at
the contested Decision of
23 November 2001;

the same time annul

Principally, order Europol to grant the applicant two
additional salary increments with effect from 1 July 2001,
and,
the
applicant one additional salary increment with effect
from 1 July 2001;

in the alternative, order Europol

to grant

3. Order Europol to pay to the applicant the amounts due
under (2) within 48 hours of pronouncement of the
judgment to be delivered in this case, plus such statutory
interest as is due on those amounts in accordance with
Netherlands law;

4. Order Europol to pay to the applicant, within 48 hours
of pronouncement of the judgment to be delivered in this
case, the sum of EUR 1 000 as compensation for the
non-material damage which she has suffered;

5. Order Europol to pay the costs incurred by the applicant

in the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant works for Europol. In the contested decision,
the defendant refused to grant a salary increase to the applicant
on the basis of her report.

this decision is contrary to
The applicant contends that
Article 29 of the Europol Staff Regulations. According to the
applicant, the Management Board has failed to lay down the
necessary rules for the award of salary increases in accordance
with that article. The applicant further pleads that the Director
exceeded his discretionary powers, inasmuch as the decision-
making procedure does not satisfy the requirements of due
care and impartiality. Lastly, the applicant pleads infringement
of the principles of equal treatment and protection of legitimate
expectations.