Case T-189/04: Action brought on 24 May 2004 by C. Van der Haegen against the European Economic and Social Committee
Date: 2004-08-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Economic and Social Committee, European official, action by staff, competition (EU), professional experience

28.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/23

Action brought on 24 May 2004 by C. Van der Haegen
against the European Economic and Social Committee

(Case T-189/04)

(2004/C 217/42)

(Language of the case: French)

the European Economic

An action against
and Social
Committee was brought before the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities on 24 May 2004 by C. van der
Haegen, residing at Brussels, represented by S. Orlandi, A.
Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers, with an address for
service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

March 2004 in Case R 333/2003-1 and alter it insofar that
it rejected the proof of evidence filed by the opponent and
insofar it rejected the opposition B-386088;

— remit

the case to the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market and order it to deny from registration the
Community trade mark application No 1607167 ‘LURA-
FLEX’ for all goods it seeks protection for;

— order

the defendant

to bear

the costs of

the current

proceedings.

— annul

the decision of

the Selection Board for internal
competition CESE/C/02/03 not to admit the applicant to
the competition tests;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The competition notice at issue required as an entry condition,
among others,
that each candidate should have five years'
working experience in the European institutions, of which at
four years should be with the Economic and Social
least
Committee and/or the Committee of the Regions. For the first
part of the competition, for which the applicant lodged his
candidature, the competition notice required, in addition, that
three years of the total experience should be in relation to the
type of functions covered by that part.

The applicant, who has acquired rich and varied working
experience in different European institutions, claims in support
of his action that the competition notice is illegal and infringes
Article 27 of the Staff Regulations and the principles of equality
of
treatment and of non-discrimination, since nothing can
justify the requirement of working experience acquired solely
with the Economic
the
Committee of the Regions, to the exclusion of the other Euro-
pean institutions.

and Social Committee

and/or

Action brought on 28 May 2004 by Flex Equipos de
Descanso, S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-192/04)

(2004/C 217/43)

(Language of the case: English)

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 28
May 2004 by Flex Equipos De Descanso, S.A., Madrid (Spain),
represented by R. Ocquet, lawyer.

Legget & Platt, Incorporated was also a party to the proceedings
before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 18

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Legget & Platt, Inc.

Community trade mark
sought:

The word mark ‘LURA-FLEX’ for
goods in classes 6 and 20 (Spring
assemblies for incorporation into
furniture, beds, mattresses
and
seating;
furniture, beds, bedding,
mattresses,...) (No 1607167)

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

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

Lucia Antonio Betere
de

Equipos

now Flex

Fabricas
S.A.,
Descanso S.A.

for

the

The Spanish trade mark registra-
tions
figurative mark
‘FLEX’ for goods in class 6 and 20
(metallic
construction materials,
metallic bed frameworks; beds,
mixed mattresses with metallic
springs, furniture,...) as well as the
reputation of these signs in rela-
tion to all kind of beds, mattresses
and pillows.

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Rejection of the opposition