Case T-216/05: Action brought on 31 May 2005 by Mebrom NV against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-07-23
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), dangerous substance, import, import restriction, ozone, pesticide

C 182/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.7.2005

Action brought on 31 May 2005 by Mebrom NV against
the Commission of the European Communities

that its import quota for 2005 was in the process of being noti-
fied to him.

(Case T-216/05)

(2005/C 182/81)

(Language of the case: English)

(1) OJ L 244, p. 1
(2) Notice to importers in the European Union in 2005 of controlled
substances that deplete the ozone layer, regarding Regulation (EC)
No 2037/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council on
substances that deplete the ozone layer (OJ 2004 C 187, p. 11)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 31 May 2005 by Mebrom NV,
established in Rieme-Ertvelde (Belgium),
represented by C.
Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— to annul Commission Decision A(05)4338 — D/6l76 of 11

April 2005;

— to order the Commission to allocate a l2-month quota to
to Article 7 of Regulation

applicant pursuant

the
2037/2000; and

— to order the Commission to pay all costs and expenses in

these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant imports Methyl Bromide (MBr) in the EU. Methyl
Bromide is a controlled substance within the meaning of Regu-
lation (EC) No 2037/2000 of the European Parliament and
Council of 29 June 2000 on substances that deplete the ozone
layer (1). With the present application, the applicant seeks the
annulment of the Commission's decision rejecting the appli-
for a quota for the importation of Methyl
cant's request
Bromide in the European Union for critical uses for 2005.

In support of its application, the applicant submits that the
Commission deprived the applicant of its right to an allocation
of a 12-month import quota for the importation of Methyl
Bromide in the EU in 2005. The applicant invokes that the
Commission manifestly misapplied the applicable legal frame-
work. According to the applicant, the Commission furthermore
violated Article 7 of Regulation 2037/2000 which, according
to the applicant, confers to it a specific right to obtain a 12-
month Methyl Bromide quota for 2005. The applicant also
claims that
the Commission acted beyond its competence
conferred by Article 7 of Regulation 2037/2000. Finally, the
applicant invokes the infringement of the principle of legal
certainty as the Commission failed to establish a predictable
system of import quotas for those who are subject to it, and
frustrated the applicant's legitimate expectations in obtaining
an import quota on the basis of Article 7 of Regulation
2037/2000,
July
2004 (2) and an e-mail message from the defendant of 10
December 2004, addressed to the applicant and confirming

the Commission's Notice to importers of

Action brought on 7 June 2005 by Bustec Ireland Limited
Partnership against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-218/05)

(2005/C 182/82)

(Language in which the application was submitted: Spanish)

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 7
June 2005 by Bustec Ireland Limited Partnership, represented
by Enrique Armijo Chavarri and Antonio Castán Peréz-Goméz,
lawyers.

Mustek, S.L. was also a party to the proceedings before the
Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 22

March 2005 in Case R 1125/2004-2;

2. order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

The applicant

Community trade mark
sought:

Figurative mark BUSTEC — Appli-
cation No 1644939, for goods in
Classes 9, 35 and 42

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

Mustek, S.L.