Case T-161/03: Action brought on 5 May 2003 by Cascades SA against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2003-07-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), application of EU law, fine, firm governed by commercial law, paperboard, restriction on competition

19.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/37

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in these proceedings objects to the two-year
delay in receiving his staff report in respect of the period
between July 1995 and June 1997 and to the contents thereof,
by comparison to the preceding reports.

In support of his claims, the applicant alleges failure to fulfil
the obligation to provide a statement of reasons, manifest error
of assessment, misuse of powers and irregular procedures.

Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Orlando Pérez-Díaz
against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-156/03)

(2003/C 171/62)

(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 30 April 2003 by Orlando Pérez-
Díaz, residing in Brussels, represented by Marc-Albert Lucas,
lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Selection Board in COM/R/A/1/
1999 not to enter his name in the reserve list for that
selection, notified to him by letter of 21 January 2003
from the Head of Personnel in the Research Directorate
General of the Commission in the name of the Chairman
of the Selection Board;

— order the Commission to pay him, by way of compen-
sation for the non-material damage and damage to his
career suffered by him as a result of the unlawfulness of
the contested decision damages at a level to be assessed
by the Court of First Instance;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

the temporary staff. By decision of 14 July 2002, the Selection
Board did not enter the applicant’s name on the reserve list.
That decision was annulled by the Court of First Instance in
Case T-102/01 Pérez-Díaz v Commission [2002] ECR II-0000.
In order to comply with that judgment, the Selection Board
decided to organise fresh oral tests in which the applicant took
part while nevertheless reserving his position as to its validity.
The selection board decided that the applicant’s results in the
new tests were not sufficient to enable him to be entered on
the reserve list.

In support of his application, the applicant puts forward five
pleas in law alleging:

— infringement of the second paragraph of Article 25 of the
Staff Regulations inasmuch as the contested decision was
inadequately reasoned;

— infringement of Article 233 of the EC Treaty and of the
principles of equal treatment and objectivity in making a
choice from among the candidates inasmuch as the
applicant’s performance was allegedly assessed under
conditions and according to criteria which were different
to those employed in respect of the other candidates;

— breach of the principles of ‘restitutio in integrum’ and of
equal treatment inasmuch as the applicant was required
to re-sit the first and third stages of the oral test and give
his views, in the second part of the second stage, on
current scientific developments which had taken place
since the original tests;

— infringement of Article 233 of the EEC Treaty, inasmuch
as the members of the new Selection Board had insuf-
ficient knowledge of the Spanish language to be able to
assess the candidate’s abilities;

— breach of the principle of ‘restitutio in integrum’ inas-
much as the composition of the new selection board was
not as close as possible to that of the original board.

Action brought on 5 May 2003 by Cascades SA against
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-161/03)

(2003/C 171/63)

(Language of the case: French)

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, an agent for the Centre for the Development of
Enterprise, applied to take part in selection procedure COM/R/
A/01/1999 organised by the defendant with a view to
establishing a reserve list for the recruitment of members of

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 May 2003 by Cascades SA,
established in La Rochette (France), represented by Jacques
Buhart and Pierre-M. Louis, lawyers.

C 171/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.7.2003

The applicant claims that the Court should:

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— order the Commission to make good the damage suffered
by it as a result of incomplete compliance with the
judgment of the Court of 28 February 2002;

— annul the decision of the Commission of 6 May 2002
definitively recruiting the applicant in Grade A 7 at step 3;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant has brought this action seeking a declaration
that the Commission is liable for failing to comply entirely
with the judgment of the Court (1) reducing the amount of the
fine imposed on the applicant by the Commission in decision
94/601/CE (Plasterboard), relating to a proceeding pursuant to
Article 85 of the EC Treaty (IV/C/33.833-Plasterboard) (2).

In the applicant’s view, the Commission should still pay the
interests due on the difference between the sum paid and the
amount of the fine finally fixed by the Court of First Instance
together with the costs, agreed by common accord of the
parties at EUR 50 000. The defendant incurs non-contractual
liability for the damage arising therefrom.

( 1) Case T-308/94 Cascades SA v Commission [2002] ECR II-0000.
( 2) OJ 1991 L 243, p. 1.

Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Pascal Millot against
the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-162/03)

(2003/C 171/64)

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant took up his duties as a probationary official on
1 August 2001 and was provisionally recruited at step 1 in
grade A 7. The applicant made a request for recruitment at a
higher grade. That request was refused.

In support of his application the applicant submits that there
was a breach of Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations in so far
as the Commission did not take account of the specific
requirements of the service. The applicant also submits that
there was a manifest error of assessment.

Action brought on 12 May 2003 by Sergio Rossi S.p.A.
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-169/03)

(2003/C 171/65)

(Language of the case: Italian)

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
12 May 2003 by Sergio Rossi S.p.A., represented by Alessandro
Ruo, lawyer.

Sissi Rossi s.r.l. was also a party to the proceedings before the
Board of Appeal.

(Language of the case: French)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 30 April 2003 by Pascal Millot, residing in
Brussels, represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert Coolen,
Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.

— declare that there is a likelihood of confusion between
the trade marks in question with regard to all the goods
referred to and annul the contested decision at issue; in
the alternative, declare that the trade marks are inconsist-
ent with each other so far as concerns ‘ladies’ bags’ and
‘ladies’ shoes’ and declare that there is an affinity between
such goods;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.