Case T-34/03: Action brought on 4 February 2003 by André Hecq and Syndicat des Fonctionnaires Internationaux et Européens (SFIE) against Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2003-04-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), civil servants’ union, contract, framework agreement, labour relations, professional association

26.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 101/37

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Dismissal of the applicant’s appli-
cation for ‘clothing, footwear and
toys’. Dismissal of the opposition
as to the remainder.

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Dismissal
appeal.

of

the

applicant’s

Pleas in law:

— infringement

of
Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94 (1);

— absence of risk of confusion;

— little distinctive character of
the opposing trade mark

— lack of similarity of

trade

marks

— products largely dissimilar.

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

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

— the decision of the College of Commissioners of
5 December 2001 improperly terminating the
framework agreement of 20 September 1974, reiter-
ating its approval of ‘operational rules concerning
the levels of concertation, the concertation body and
the relevant procedures’ dated 20 January 2000 and
an alleged ‘agreement’ of 4 April 2001 on the
‘resources to be made available to the central and
the local staff committees and the unions’;

— annul, to the extent necessary,

the abovementioned
decisions of 15 January 2002, 23 January 2002 and
5 December 2001;

— order the defendant to pay damages amounting to

EUR 100 000;

— order the defendant to pay the costs of of the action,
pursuant to Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure and
the expenses necessarily incurred for the purpose of the
proceedings,
in particular the travel and subsistence
expenses and the remuneration of agents, advisers or
lawyers, under Article 73(b) of those rules.

Action brought on 4 February 2003 by André Hecq and
Syndicat des Fonctionnaires Internationaux et Européens
(SFIE) against Commission of the European Communities

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Case T-34/03)

(2003/C 101/68)

(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 4 February 2003 by André Hecq,
residing in Mondercange (Luxembourg), and Syndicat des
Fonctionnaires Internationaux et Européens (SFIE), whose
main offices are in Brussels, represented by Lucas Vogel,
lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decsion of the appointing authority of 4 Octo-
ber 2002, notified to the applicant on 9 October 2002
but received by him on 25 October 2002, rejecting the
applicant’s complaint, lodged on 24 April 2002, pursuant
to Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations in which he
criticised various decisions, in particular:

— two separate decisions notified on 15 January 2002

and 23 January 2002 respectively;

The applicant is an official of the Commission and secretary
general of the ‘Syndicat des Fonctionnaires Internationaux et
Européens’ (SFIE) trade union.

In support of his application,
the applicant alleges, first,
infringement of the framework agreement of 20 September
1974, in particular of the final provisions thereof, and breach
of the general principles of contract law. According to the
applicant, the framework agreement does not provide for
unilateral termination.

The applicant also alleges infringement of Articles 11 and 12
of the framework agreement of 20 September 1974 in that
the abovementioned provisions had not been agreed to by all
the unions.

The applicant alleges next infringement of Article 24a of the
Staff Regulations, Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the framework
agreement of 20 September 1974, manifest error of assessment
and breach of the principle of non-discrimination. According
to the applicant, the criteria relating to representativeness are
erroneous and arbitrary and favour certain unions.

C 101/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.4.2003

Finally, the applicant alleges breach of the principle of non-
discrimination in that the contested decisions deprived the
union of which the applicant is the secretary general of all
manner of human and material resources without taking
account of its representativeness.

compensation for the material damage he allegedly suffered in
the period between 1 July and 31 December 2001 and has
made the present application. In support of his arguments, he
alleges infringement of the abovementioned article of the Staff
Regulations.

Action brought on 31 January 2003 by José Pedro
Pessoa e Costa against Commission of the European
Communities

Action brought on 7 February 2003 by DaimlerChrysler
AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-36/03)

(2003/C 101/69)

(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 31 January 2003 by José Pedro
Pessoa e Costa, residing in Brussels, represented by Albert
Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis et Étienne Marchal, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that the Commission commited an administrative
fault by not reinstating the applicant to the first vacancy
at Grade A 5 commensurate with his abilities;

— order the Commission to reconstitute his career and, in
particular, to pay him the remuneration to which he is
entitled in respect of
to
31 December 2001 together with default interest calcu-
lated at the rate of 1.5 % per annum;

the period from 1 August

(Case T-39/03)

(2003/C 101/70)

(Language of the case: to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
of the Rules of Procedure — Language in which the application was
submitted: 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
7 February 2003 by DaimlerChrysler AG, Stuttgart, Germany,
represented by M. Trimborn, lawyer. AXON Leasing GmbH,
Grasbrunn, Germany, was also a party to the proceedings
before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
4 November 2002 in appeal No R 329/2001-4 and
dismiss the appeal;

— order the defendant Office to pay the costs.

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an official working for the defendant, on leave
on personal grounds until 30 June 2001, requested his
reinstatement, in accordance with Article 40(4)(d) of the Staff
Regulations of officials of the European Communities. On
30 May 2002, the applicant lodged a complaint claiming that
the defendant had failed to reinstate him to the first vacancy
corresponding to his grade and abilities. The applicant claims
that that complaint was partially rejected so far as concerns

Community trade mark
sought:

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in the oppo-
sition proceedings:

The applicant

The word mark ‘AXOR’ for goods
and services in Classes 12 and 37
(automobiles and parts therefor
(included in Class 12) and motor
vehicle maintenance and repair)
— application No 1111061

AXON Leasing GmbH