Case T-338/03: Action brought on 25 September 2003 by Eridania Sadam S.p.A. and Others against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2003-11-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), common organisation of markets, intervention price, white sugar

29.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/33

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
Marks and Designs) of 20 June 2003 (Case R 348/2002-
4) in so far as if concluded that trade mark No 1 575 521
does not satisfy the requirements of Article 7(1)(b) and
(c) of Regulation No 40/94;

— order

trade mark
no 1 575 521 under Article 40 of Regulation No 40/94;

Community

publication

of

— in the alternative, refer the case back to the Board of

Appeal for determination;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Sadam S.p.A. and Others, represented by Gualtiero Pittalis,
Ivano Vigliotti, Gian Michele Roberti, Paolo Ziotti and Alessan-
dra Franchi, against the Commission of the European Com-
munities.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul Article 1(c) of Commission Regulation (EC) No
1158/2003 of 30 June 2003 fixing the derived inter-
vention price for white sugar for the 2003/04 marketing
year for all areas in Italy;

— in the alternative, declare under Article 241 EC that
Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of
19 June 2001 on the common organisation of the
markets in the sugar sector is unlawful and inapplicable;

Pleas in law and main arguments

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Community trade mark Word mark ‘EUROPREMIUM’ —
sought:

application no 1 575 521

Pleas in law and main arguments

Goods or services:

Decision appealed to the
Board of Appeal:

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Goods and services in Classes 16,
20, 35 and 39 (including paper,
goods made of wood, advertising
and transport and storage)

Refusal by the examiner to register

Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law:

— the trade mark is sufficiently

distinctive

— there is no need to preserve
the availability of the mark
as it is not descriptive

Action brought on 25 September 2003 by Eridania Sadam
S.p.A. and Others against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-338/03)

(2003/C 289/68)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action was brought before the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities on 25 September 2003 by Eridania

By the present action,
the applicant companies challenge
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1158/2003 of 30 June 2003
fixing the derived intervention prices for white sugar for the
2003/04 marketing year (‘the contested regulation’) (1).
In
support of their action the applicants raise the pleas in law set
out below.

the applicants submit that,

First,
in several respects, the
contested regulation is in conflict with the basic regulation
adopted by the Council
in the form of Regulation (EC)
No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 (2).

In particular, the applicants complain that
the contested
regulation erroneously classifies Italy as a ‘deficit area’ for the
supply of sugar, thereby applying the system of derived prices
(known as ‘Regionalisation’) to Italy. That classification, based,
in the applicants’ view, on an incorrect analysis of the
economic situation, prejudices them in so far as the introduc-
tion of derived prices results in an increase in the production
costs for sugar undertakings operating in Italy. In particular,
according to the applicants, when assessing Italian domestic
supply, the Commission failed to take account of the quantities
of white sugar imported free of duty from the Balkan countries.
Those imports significantly alter the conditions in which the
common organisation of the market functions bringing about
significant imbalances which appear more serious following
the application of regionalisation to the Italian market.

The applicants therefore consider that Article 1(c) of the
contested regulation is both flawed in terms of its assumptions
and potentially contrary in its effects to the Community
principles on which the common agricultural policy is based,
the WTO rules relating to sugar and the principles of
proportionality and non-discrimination.

C 289/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.11.2003

In the event that the Court does not make the declaration
primarily sought against the contested regulation, the appli-
cants seek in the alternative a declaration from the Court that
Article 2 of Regulation No 1260/2001 is unlawful and
inapplicable in so far as it enables the Commission when
setting the derived intervention price on the basis of market
trends to disregard the effect of unrestricted imports free of
duty.

Second, the applicants assert that the statement of reasons for
the contested regulation appears inadequate and contradictory
given that, by that measure, the Commission has altered its
own practice of preceding years — inasmuch as Italy was not
included in the States covered by regionalisation — without
any objective justification for that change and without taking
account of the specific situation arising from the abovemen-
tioned imports free of duty of white sugar from the Balkans.

Third, and in the alternative, the applicants submit that even
without taking account of the imports free of duty of white
sugar from the Balkans in assessing domestic supply, the
Commission should not deemed Italy to be a ‘deficit area’.

(1) OJ L 162 of 1.7.2003, p. 24.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19 June 2001 on the
common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ
L 178 of 30.6.2001, p. 1).

Action brought on 6 October 2003 by Gabrielle Clotuche
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-339/03)

(2003/C 289/69)

(Language of the case: French)

— annul the decision of the Commission of 1 October 2003
fixing the new organigram of DG ESTAT in so far as it
does not thereby constitute a reassignment of the appli-
cant where another individual reassignment measure is
ordered in addition;

— order the Commission to pay her EUR 25 000 by way of
compensation for the non-material damage suffered as a
result of irregular conduct;

— order the Commission to pay the costs in their entirety.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant, a Commission official, was transferred on
16 January 2003 to Eurostat as Director of the Social Statistics
Directorate. On 9 July 2003, in view of the serious irregularities
the Commission
which allegedly took place in Eurostat,
decided to move all Eurostat’s directors, including the appli-
cant, to posts as Principal Advisers. On 1 October 2003, the
Commission decided on a new structure for the reformed DG
ESTAT departments and decided that, in principle, it would
open applications for the posts in the new directorates to both
external and internal applicants, without taking account of the
applicant. The applicant contests both those decisions claiming
that the alleged irregularities within Eurostat took place until
2001 at the latest, while she was not posted there until 2003
and was thus not
In support of her
involved in them.
application, she alleges infringement of Articles 4, 7, 24, 25
and 47 of the Staff Regulations, breach of the principle of
equal treatment and of prohibition of discrimination, the
principle of sound administration, the principles ‘audi alteram
partem’ and ‘patere legem’, manifest error of assessment, abuse
of process and misuse of powers.

Action brought on 2 October 2003 by Wanadoo Inter-
active S.A. against the Commission of the European
Communities

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 6 October 2003 by Gabrielle
Clotuche, residing in Brussels, represented by Pierre-Paul Van
Gehuchten, Gilbert Demez Jacques Sambon, lawyers.

(Case T-340/03)

(2003/C 289/70)

(Language of the case: French)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Commission of 9 July 2003 to
reassign the applicant by transfer in the interest of the
service from her post as Director of the Social Statistics
Directorate at Eurostat to a post as Principal Adviser at
Eurostat;

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 2 October 2003 by Wanadoo
Interactive S.A., whose registered office is in Issy-les-Mou-
lineaux (France), represented by O.W. Brouwer, H. Calvet,
M. Pittie and J. Philippe, lawyers.