Case T-187/04: Action brought on 19 May 2004 by DJ (*) against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2004-08-07
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), administrative procedure, equal treatment, professional career, regulations for civil servants, staff assessment

7.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 201/19

Pleas in law and main arguments:

European  Communities  on  19  May  2004  by  DJ  (*), 
represented  by  Carlos  Mourato, lawyer.

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Community trade mark
sought:

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in the opposi-
tion proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in
opposition.

Spaform Limited

Word mark ‘SPAFORM’ — appli-
cation No 609 776 for goods in
Classes 7 (pumps, etc.), 9 (appa-
for
ratus
measuring
11
(whirlpool baths)

instruments
and

pressure)

and

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—  Annul  the  decision  of  22  July  2003  of  the  Appeal  Assessor
concerning the applicant's career development report for
the period 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002;

The applicant

— Annul the appointing authority's implied decision of 20
February 2004 giving a negative reply to the applicant's
complaint;

national mark

The
SPA for
products in Classes 32 (mineral
waters, etc.)

— Order the defendant to pay the costs of the case and also
the essential costs incurred for the purposes of the proceed-
ings,
in particular the costs of domiciliation, travel and
lodging, and also lawyers' fees.

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Dismissal of the application

Decision of
of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board

Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law and main arguments

Infringement of Article 18(1) of
Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (1).
On the basis of that article, the
Opposition Division held that the
information available to the Office
at
the opposition
period did not permit identifica-
tion of the earlier mark relied on.
The applicant calls
in question
that finding.

end of

the

In support of his action, the applicant claims first of all that
there has been a series of breaches of the assessment procedure
and of the provisions for the implementation of Article 43 of
the Staff Regulations, namely:

— the fact

that a different official should have been his
assessor, since it was the official who was his hierarchical
superior and not the assessor who appears in the contested
report,

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995
implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Com-
munity trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).

— failure to consult his previous superiors,

— the belated nature of the second dialogue and also of the

opinion of the Appeal Assessor,

Action  brought  on  19  May  2004  by  DJ  (*)  against the 
Commission of the European Communities

— the allegedly unlawful appointment of the President of the

Joint Assessment Committee.

(Case T-187/04)

(2004/C 201/41)

(Language of the case: French)

An  action  against  the  Commission  of  the  European  Commu-
nities  was  brought  before  the  Court  of  First  Instance  of  the

the independence of

The applicant also claims that there has been a breach of the
internal auditors, on the
principle of
ground that one of
the Joint Assessment
the members of
Committee was from a Directorate-General audited by the
applicant and that the applicant's Appeal Assessor was the
Secretary-General of the Commission, who was himself liable
to be audited. The applicant claims that in the light of that
situation, it is the Vice-President responsible for the reform of
the Commission who should have been his Appeal Assessor.
Last, the applicant relies on breach of the obligation to state
reasons and of the principle of equal treatment and also on
manifest errors of assessment by the assessor.

(*)   Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.