Case T-346/04: Action brought on 17 August 2004 by Sadas S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-10-23
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), clothing industry, trade-mark law

C 262/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.10.2004

— the memorandum of 14 July 2004, n.

JE/OA D (2004)
5446, concerning DOCUP OB 2 — Friuli-Venezia Giulia
Region 2000-2006 (No. CCI 2000 IT 16 2 DO 013) —
Certification of the intermediate statement of expenses and
claim for payment, received on 15 July 2004, by which the
European Commission — Directorate General Regional
Policy — Regional
Italy,
transmitted the following decision: ‘the Commission there-
fore requests the submission of the intermediate statement
of expenses and the claim for payment in question together
with the following information in respect of every measure
providing for an aid scheme:

intervention in France, Greece,

— total amount of advances paid

— amount of the advances paid which are eligible for

structural fund contribution as previously stated.

In the absence of such information, the Commission will
not be able to make the payment requested in respect of
the measures relating to the aid scheme of the DocUP
Friuli-Venezia Giulia 2000-2006 Objective 2’ together with
all other connected and prior acts;

the relevant
regulation in the present case
applicant,
precludes
the approach adopted by the Commission,
according to which the rules on eligibility of expenditure
must be understood to mean that they subject eligibility of
expenditure to evidence that the financing has actually been
used to carry out a project which fulfils the purpose for
which the aid was granted.

— infringement of

the rules governing financial control
(Article 38 of the basic regulation and implementing provi-
sions) which do not provide for the requirements alleged by
the Commission.

— breach of the principle of proportionality, in view of the
fact that the Commission requires evidence beyond that
which is required and necessary.

— infringement of Regulation No 448/04 by breach of the
principles of equality and legal certainty and contradiction
in the contested memorandum.

— infringement of Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 438/2001 for failure to observe the accounting rules
provided for therein.

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

— breach of the principle of simplified procedures.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

This action has been brought against the memoranda of the
European Commission of 17 June 2004 No D (2004) 4074
(DOCUP Regione Lombardia) and of 14 July 2004 No JE/OA D
(2004) 5446 (DOCUP Friuli Venezia Giulia), both of which
seek to subject the procedure for the payment of advances in
the context of aid schemes to conditions which are not
required by the legislation in force with the purpose of limiting
improperly the expenditure which is eligible for the use of the
structural funds concerned.

In support of its claims, the Italian Republic alleges:

— breach of essential procedural requirements inasmuch as
the legal basis is incorrect, there is no statement of reasons
and the decision-making procedure has not been complied
with. The applicant points out
the
contested acts make no mention of the provision of law
enabling them to be adopted.

in that regard that

Further to the breach of the obligation to provide reasons, the
applicant also claims that the contested memoranda were not
adopted in accordance with the correct procedure provided by
the Commission's rules of procedure.

— infringement of Article 32 of the basic regulation (Council
Regulation No 1260/99) and of Commission Regulation No
448/04 which make subject payment of advances only to
evidence that the State which is the final beneficiary has
paid the relevant monies to the final recipients of
the
investment.

Action brought on 17 August 2004 by Sadas S.A. against
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-346/04)

(2004/C 262/103)

(Language in which the application was submitted: French)

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 17
August 2004 by Sadas S.A., established in Tourcoing (France),
represented by A. Bertrand, lawyer.

L.T.J. Diffusion was also a party to the proceedings before the
Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— alter in its entirety the operative part of the decision of the

First Board of Appeal in Case R 393/2003-1;

— annul the decision contested in that case by which the
examiner found that there is a likelihood of confusion in
the minds of the public between the mark ‘ARTHUR’ and
sought
the mark in respect of which registration is
‘ARTHUR ET FELICIE’;

— infringement of the rules governing eligibility of the expen-
diture laid down in the basic regulation. According to the

— order L.T.J. Diffusion to pay the costs.

23.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/57

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

The applicant.

discrimination, since it was taken without considering the
option of allowing him additional seniority in his grade on
account of his training and professional experience prior to his
recruitment.

Community trade mark
sought:

Three-dimensional mark ‘ARTHUR
ET
FELICIE’ — Application
No 0373787.

Goods or services:

Goods in Classes 16, 24 and 25.

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in opposition:

L.T.J. Diffusion.

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

National trade mark ‘ARTHUR’ for
Class 25 (clothing).

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Rejection of the opposition.

Action brought on 20 August 2004 by Société Internatio-
nale de Diffusion et d'Édition against the Commission of
the European Communities

(Case T-348/04)

(2004/C 262/105)

Decision of
of Appeal:

the Board

Annulment of the decision of the
Opposition Division.

(Language of the case: French)

Pleas in law:

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94.

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 20 August 2004 by Société Interna-
tionale de Diffusion et d'Édition (SIDE), established in Vitry-sur-
Seine (France), represented by Nicole Coutrelis and Valérie
Giacobbo, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

Action brought on 17 August 2004 by Pascal Millot
against the Commission of the European Communities

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Case T-347/04)

(2004/C 262/104)

(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
European Communities on 17 August 2004 by Pascal Millot,
resident in Brussels, represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert
Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, lawyers, with an
address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul Article 1, last sentence, of the Commission decision
of 20 April 2004 concerning the implementation by France
of aid in favour of the Coopérative d'Exportation du livre
français (CELF);

— in the alternative, annul Article 1, last sentence, of the deci-
sion insofar as it declares the aid compatible before 1994
or, alternatively, 1997 or 1999;

— in the further alternative, annul Article 1, last sentence, of
the decision insofar as it declares the aid compatible before
1 November 1993;

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

— annul the Commission's decision of 11 September 2003
definitively setting the applicant's grading at the first step in
Grade A6;

Pleas in law and main arguments:

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of his action, the applicant argues that the contested
decision infringes the second paragraph of Article 32 of the
Staff Regulations and the principle of equal treatment and non-

The applicant is an export agency for French-language books.
In 1992, it lodged a complaint with the Commission relating
to aid paid since 1977 by the French Government to the
(CELF). The
Coopérative d'Exportation du Livre Français
Commission adopted decisions pursuant
to that complaint.
Those decisions were annulled by judgments of 18 September
1995 in Case T-49/93 and of 28 February 2002 in Case T-
155/98. Further to the second judgment,
the Commission
adopted a third decision which is challenged in this action.