do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-18/06: Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 July 2006 — Deutsche Telekom v OHIM (Alles, was uns verbindet)
Date: 2006-09-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

C 212/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.9.2006

In the alternative, the applicants seek an increase of 10 % of
the 40 % reduction of the fine granted under the Leniency
Notice on the ground that the Commission misapplied the
Leniency Notice in that Eka was not granted the highest reduc-
tion available within the relevant band, notwithstanding the
fact that its cooperation fully met the criteria established at
point 23, second paragraph, of the Leniency Notice. According
to the applicants, the Commission therefore violated the appli-
cant's legitimate expectations.

Furthermore,
the applicants contend that
violated the principle of equal treatment in that it treated:

the Commission

i) similar situations, i.e. that of Eka and Arkema who's coop-
eration fully met the criteria in point 23 of the Leniency
Notice,
in a different manner by granting the maximum
reduction available within the relevant band only to
Arkema, and

ii) different situations, i.e. that of Eka and Solvay, in a similar
manner by granting both a reduction of the fine which is
not the highest reduction available under the relevant band
even though Eka, according to the applicants, had contrib-
uted more valuable and timely cooperation than Solvay.

(1) Commission notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines

in cartel cases (OJ 2002 C 45, p. 3)

Order of the Court of First Instance of 27 June 2006 —
Marker Völkl v OHIM — Icon Health & Fitness Italia
(MOTION)

(Case T-217/05) (1)

(2006/C 212/79)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 205, 20.8.2005.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 July 2006 —
Deutsche Telekom v OHIM (Alles, was uns verbindet)

(Case T-18/06) (1)

(2006/C 212/80)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 29 June 2006 —
UNIPOR-Ziegel-Marketing v OHIM-Dörken (DELTA)

(Case T-159/05) (1)

(2006/C 212/78)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 6 July 2006 —
Cofira-Sac v Commission

(Case T-43/06) (1)

(2006/C 212/81)

Language of the case: Italian

(1) OJ C 171, 9.7.2005.

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 86, 8.4.2006.
Case F-12/05: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2006 — Tas v Commission (Recruitment — Open competition — Eligibility criteria — Non-admission to the tests — Qualifications — Professional qualification — Equal treatment)
Date: 2006-09-02
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), competition (EU)

2.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/47

EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber)
of 11 July 2006 — Tas v Commission

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of
12 July 2006 — D v Commission

(Case F-12/05) (1)

(Case F-18/05) (1)

(Recruitment — Open competition — Eligibility criteria —
Non-admission to the tests — Qualifications — Professional
qualification — Equal treatment)

(Occupational disease — Request for recognition that the
is
aggravation of the disease from which the applicant

suffering is of occupational origin)

(2006/C 212/82)

(2006/C 212/83)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: David Tas (Brussels, Belgium)
Orlandi, X. Martin, A. Coolen,
lawyers)

(represented by: S.
J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal,

Applicant: D (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J. Van Rossum,
S. Orlandi and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall, Agent)

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Selection Board's decision not to admit the
applicant to the tests in competition EPSO/A/4/03, organised
to draw up a reserve list of assistant administrators at Grade A
8 in the sectors
‘Law’,
‘Economy’ and ‘Audit’.

‘European public administration’,

Annulment of the Commission's decision to reject the appli-
the
the aggravation of
cant's request
disease from which he is suffering is of occupational origin.

for recognition that

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the application;

1. Annuls the decision of the Commission of the European Commu-
the applicant's

nities rejecting the request
disease or aggravation thereof is of occupational origin.

for recognition that

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

of the costs.

2. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay all

(1) OJ C 132, 28.05.2005 (case initially registered at the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities under number T-124/05
and transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union
by order of 15.12.2005).

(1) OJ C 155, 25.6.2005 (case initially registered at the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities under Case T-147/05 and
transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union by
order of 15.12.2005).
Case F-18/05: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 12 July 2006 — D v Commission (Occupational disease — Request for recognition that the aggravation of the disease from which the applicant is suffering is of occupational origin)
Date: 2006-09-02
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), disability insurance, occupational disease, reassignment

2.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/47

EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber)
of 11 July 2006 — Tas v Commission

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of
12 July 2006 — D v Commission

(Case F-12/05) (1)

(Case F-18/05) (1)

(Recruitment — Open competition — Eligibility criteria —
Non-admission to the tests — Qualifications — Professional
qualification — Equal treatment)

(Occupational disease — Request for recognition that the
is
aggravation of the disease from which the applicant

suffering is of occupational origin)

(2006/C 212/82)

(2006/C 212/83)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: David Tas (Brussels, Belgium)
Orlandi, X. Martin, A. Coolen,
lawyers)

(represented by: S.
J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal,

Applicant: D (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J. Van Rossum,
S. Orlandi and J.-N. Louis, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J. Currall, Agent)

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Selection Board's decision not to admit the
applicant to the tests in competition EPSO/A/4/03, organised
to draw up a reserve list of assistant administrators at Grade A
8 in the sectors
‘Law’,
‘Economy’ and ‘Audit’.

‘European public administration’,

Annulment of the Commission's decision to reject the appli-
the
the aggravation of
cant's request
disease from which he is suffering is of occupational origin.

for recognition that

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

The Tribunal:

1. Dismisses the application;

1. Annuls the decision of the Commission of the European Commu-
the applicant's

nities rejecting the request
disease or aggravation thereof is of occupational origin.

for recognition that

2. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

of the costs.

2. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay all

(1) OJ C 132, 28.05.2005 (case initially registered at the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities under number T-124/05
and transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union
by order of 15.12.2005).

(1) OJ C 155, 25.6.2005 (case initially registered at the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities under Case T-147/05 and
transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union by
order of 15.12.2005).
Case F-9/05: Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 July 2006 — Lacombe v Council
Date: 2006-09-02
Institutions: Civil Service Tribunal
Subjects: Council of the European Union, action by staff, indemnification, servant (EU), social-security contribution, unemployment insurance

2.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/49

— so far as necessary, annul the decision of the authority
empowered to conclude contracts of employment (AECE)
of 31 March 2005 rejecting the applicant's complaint;

In addition, according to the applicant, the defendant infringed
the general principles which safeguard the right to dignity and
to a defence and made superfluous critical comments.

— order the defendant to pay the applicant, as compensation
for the loss suffered, damages assessed on equitable grounds
at EUR 85 473 for material loss and EUR 50 000 for non-
material loss, such amounts to be increased or reduced as
appropriate during the proceedings;

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

formerly a member of

The applicant,
the Commission's
temporary staff, was taken on from 16 September 2004 until
15 September 2009 under a contract which provided for a
probationary period of 6 months, in accordance with Article
14 of
the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.
Following an initial negative evaluation report, an extension of
the probationary period by six months and a second negative
evaluation report, the defendant terminated that contract.

In his application, the applicant submits that the defendant
made manifest errors of assessment, in so far as, first, it used
facts as a basis or misinterpreted the facts and,
incorrect
second,
it blamed the applicant for problems for which he
could not be held responsible.

The applicant finally argues that, by not completing the evalua-
tion report at the latest one month before the expiry of the
probationary period, the defendant infringed Article 14 of the
Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 July 2006 —
Lacombe v Council

(Case F-9/05) (1)

(2006/C 212/87)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Tribunal sitting in full court has ordered
that the case be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 115 of 14.05.2005. (case initially registered before the Court
the European Communities under number
of First
T-116/05 and transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of 15.12.2005).

Instance of