Case T-116/05: Action brought on 28 February 2005 by Dorian Lacombe against the Council of the European Union
Date: 2005-05-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, action by staff, indemnification, servant (EU), social-security contribution, unemployment insurance

C 115/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.5.2005

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— breach of the principle of good administration and sound
management and breach of the duty to have regard for the
welfare of officials.

1. annul the Invalidity Committee's decision of 21 April 2004
refusing the applicant's request of 19 January 2004 to be
declared invalid, notified by memo of 27 April 2004,

2. annul the Invalidity Committee's decision of 22 July 2004
granting a declaration of invalidity, in so far as the effect of
the declaration of invalidity is not retroactive to 21 April
2004,

Action brought on 28 February 2005 by Dorian Lacombe
against the Council of the European Union

3. grant the applicant compensation for material and non-
at
the

assessed on an equitable basis
to increase in the course of

material damage
EUR 222 568, subject
proceedings,

4. order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Case T-116/05)

(2005/C 115/61)

(Language of the case: French)

The applicant in this case objects to the defendant's decision to
invalidity for three years from 1
grant his declaration of
September 2004 without providing for retroactive effect to 21
April 2004, the date on which the Invalidity Committee took
an initial adverse decision in regard to him.

In support of his claims, the applicant pleads:

— infringement of Article 7 of Annex II to the Staff Regula-
tions and of the rules relating to the operation of the Inva-
lidity Committee. He maintains in that regard that two of
the three doctors comprising the Invalidity Committee had
no knowledge either of his illness or of his state of health,

— in this case, the Committee made a manifest error of assess-
ment regarding the nature of his illness. It is stated in that
regard that the Invalidity Committee took no account what-
soever of the existence of an illness different from sleeping
disorders, namely the chronic fatigue previously diagnosed,

— failure to comply with the obligation to state reasons,

An action against the Council of the European Union was
brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities on 28 February 2005 by Dorian Lacombe,
residing in Evry (France), represented by Sébastien Orlandi,
Xavier Martin, Albert Coolen,
Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne
Marchal, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. order the Council to pay to the applicant an amount corre-
sponding to the total amount of overtime worked in accord-
ance with the statement signed for agreement by his
immediate superior and by the Secretary-General of the
Council, less the amount already paid,

2. order the Council to pay to the applicant's social security
scheme the employer's contributions provided for by the
legislation in force,

3. order the Council to pay to the applicant the unemployment
benefits to which he would have been entitled if
the
employer's contributions had been paid in due time to his
social security scheme,

— infringement of Articles 53 and 78 of the Staff Regulations
and of Articles 13 to 18 of Annex VIII to those regulations,

4. order the defendant to pay to the applicant default interest
calculated at the ECB central rate plus 2 points on all sums
which should have been paid under the auxiliary staff
contract between the parties.

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/35

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

the auxiliary staff at

The applicant was a member of
the
Council from 1 December 2002 to 31 July 2003. He claims
that the Council reduced from 73 to 59.5 days the amount of
overtime to which he was entitled for hours worked on Satur-
days, Sundays, holidays and days when the offices were closed,
without informing him of the reasons. In support of this claim,
the applicant pleads infringement of Article 57 of the Condi-
tions of employment of other
the European
Communities, infringement of Article 56 of the Staff Regula-
tions, infringement of Staff Notice No 88/93 and breach of the
duty to state reasons.

servants of

The applicant further alleges that, in breach of Article 70 of the
Conditions of employment of other servants of the European
Communities,
the Council did not pay the contributions
payable to the Caisse de Sécurité Sociale (French Social Security
Fund) of which he was a member. The applicant also claims
compensation for the damage which he suffered as a conse-
quence.

Action brought on 7 March 2005 by Reckitt Benckiser
N.V. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-118/05)

(2005/C 115/62)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
(Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Market
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 7
March 2005 by Reckitt Benckiser N.V., established in Hoofd-
dorp (The Netherlands), represented by G.S.P. Vos, lawyer.

Community trade mark
concerned:

The three dimensional mark of a
rectangular capsule with a black
and white wave around a white
circle for goods in classes 1 and 3
(Chemical products for industrial
purposes;
softeners;
water
bleaching preparations and other
laundry use and
substances for
...) — application
dish washing;
No 2 897 338

Decision of
iner:

the exam-

Rejection of the trade mark appli-
cation

Decision of
of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board

Dismissal of the appeal

Wrongful application of Article
7(1)(c) of Council Regulation No
40/94, Violation of Article 7(1)(b)
and infringement of the duty to
state sufficient reasons

Action brought on 7 March 2005 by Reckitt Benckiser
N.V. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-119/05)

(2005/C 115/63)

(Language of the case: English)

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the contested decision of the Second Board of Appeal

of OHIM;

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 7
March 2005 by Reckitt Benckiser N.V., established in Hoofd-
dorp (The Netherlands) represented by G.S.P. Vos, lawyer.

— allow the registration of the Community trade mark appli-

The applicant claims that the Court should:

cation number 2 897 338;

— order OHIM to pay the costs in accordance with Article
the Court of First

the Rules of Procedure of

87(2) of
Instance.

— annul the decision adopted on 17 December 2004 by the
Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)in case R
43/2004-2