Case T-110/03: Action brought on 24 March 2003 by Jose Maria Sison against the Council of the European Union
Date: 2003-06-21
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, access to information, action for annulment (EU), charge, human rights, public safety, rights of the defence, terrorism

21.6.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/39

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

The applicant claims that the Court should:

of 9 April 2003

in Case T-217/01: Forum des migrants de l’Union euro-
péenne v Commission of the European Communities (1)

(Community financial support — Operating costs —
Decision to terminate financial support — Principle of sound
financial management — Interpretation of the conditions of
support — Right to a fair hearing — Protection of legitimate
expectations)

(2003/C 146/70)

— annul, on the basis of art. 230 of EC Treaty, Council
Decision of 21 January 2003 (41/c/01/02): Answer
adopted by the Council on the 21st of January 2003 to
the confirmatory application of M. Jan Fermon sent by
fax on the 11 of December 2002 under Article 7 (2) of
the Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, notified to the
applicant’s counsel on January 23, 2003.

— require the respondent party to bear the costs of suit.

(Language of the case: French)

Pleas in law and main arguments

the European Communities

In Case T-217/01, Forum des migrants de l’Union européenne,
having its registered office in Brussels (Belgium), represented
initially by E. Degrez and subsequently by N. Crama, lawyers,
v Commission of
(Agents:
A.-M. Rouchaud-Joët and L. Parpala): Application for annul-
ment of the Commission’s decision of 11 July 2001 to
terminate the financial support granted to the applicant under
Article A0-3040 of the Community budget, the Court of First
Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of: V. Tiili, President,
P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges; D. Christensen, Adminis-
trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 April 2003,
in which it:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders the applicant to pay its own costs and those of the

defendant.

( 1) OJ C 317 of 10.11.2001.

Action brought on 24 March 2003 by Jose Maria Sison
against the Council of the European Union

(Case T-110/03)

(2003/C 146/71)

The applicant in the present case, who is also the applicant in
Case T-47/03 Sison against Council and Commission (1),
pursues the annulment of the defendants decision not to allow
him access to all the documents which formed the basis of the
Council Decision 2002/848/EC (2), by which the applicant
himself and the New People’s Army (NPA) are included in the
list pertinent to Article 2(3) of Regulation 2580/2001 (3), as
well as access to any information regarding which Member
States provided documents mentioned in the contested
Decision. The applicant also asked to be informed about the
rules and criteria applied by the Council regarding sensitive
documents that shall be made public following Article 9,
point 6, of Regulation 1049/2001 (4).

The Council’s position was based on Article 4(a), first and third
the Regulation 1049/2001. According to the
points, of
information with regard to
the disclosure of
defendant,
combatting terrorism, which is in the possession of the
Member States authorities, could give the persons, entities or
groups who are the subject of this information, the opportunity
to threaten the efforts of these authorities and thus undermine
the protection of public interest as regards public security.
With reference to the Member States that provided sensitive
documents, the Council stated that the ‘originator authority’ is
opposed to the disclosure of the requested information. About
the rules concerning sensitive documents, the Council referred
to the Council decision 2001/264/CE adopting the Council’s
security regulations.

In support of its application, the applicant submits:

(Language of the case: English)

— Failure of motivation and violation of the principle of

sound administration.

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 24 March 2003 by Jose Maria Sison, Utrecht,
the Netherlands, represented by Mr J. Fermon, Mr A. Comte,
Mr H. Schultz and Mr D. Gurses, lawyers.

— Violation of the principles enshrined in Article 6 ECHR
and especially of the right to be informed promptly, in a
language which the applicant understands and in detail,
of the nature and cause of the accusation, as well as of
the principle of proportionality.

C 146/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.6.2003

With regard to this last point, the applicant states that the
right to be informed of the cause of the accusation against him
cannot be neutralised by the protection of public interest as
regards public security and international relations. Considering
all the damages suffered by the applicant, the balance of
interest is in his favour.

( 1) Not published in the OJ yet.
( 2) Council Decision of 28 October 2002 implementing Article 2(3)
of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures
directed against certain persons and entities with a view to
combating terrorism and repealing Decision 2002/460/EC (OJ
L 295 of 30.10.2001, p. 12).

( 3) Council Regulation of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive
measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view
to combating terrorism (OJ L 344 of 28.12.2001, p. 70).

( 4) Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council of 30 May
2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council
and Commission documents (OJ L 145 of 31.5.2001, p. 43).

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

The applicant.

Community trade mark
sought:

Figurative mark ‘NLSPORT’ —
Application No 816 512 for
goods within Classes 3, 14, 18
and 25.

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

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

Naulover S.A.

trade

mark
Community
No 13417, consisting in an N
superposed on an L, both in
English characters.

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Refusal of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Annulment of the decision of the
Opposition Division and accept-
ance of the opposition.

Action brought on 4 April 2003 by New Look Limited
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Pleas in law:

application

of
Incorrect
Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/494 (likelihood of con-
fusion).

(Case T-117/03)

(2003/C 146/72)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

Action brought on 4 April 2003 by New Look Limited
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
4 April 2003 by New Look Limited, with its official address
in Weymouth (Dorset), United Kingdom,
represented by
R. Ballester and G. Marín, lawyers, of the firm Marks & Clerk.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Case T-118/03)

(2003/C 146/73)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

— Annul the decision of 27 January 2003 of the Second

Board of Appeal of OHIM in Case No R95/2002-1, and

— Order the applicant, as well as any intervener, to pay the
costs arising from the proceedings and from Case No 95/
2001-1 before the First Board of Appeal of OHIM.

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
4 April 2003 by New Look Limited, with its official address
in Weymouth (Dorset), United Kingdom, represented by
R. Ballester and G. Marín, lawyers, of the firm Marks & Clerk.