Case T-253/06 P: Appeal brought on 8 September 2006 by Chassagne against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 29 June 2006 in Case F-11/05, Chassagne v Commission
Date: 2006-11-18
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, appeal, equal treatment, regulations for civil servants

C 281/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

18.11.2006

Appeal brought on 11 September 2006 by Ott and Others
against the order of 30 June 2006 by the Civil Service
Tribubal in Case F-87/05 Ott and Others v Commission

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-250/06 P)

(2006/C 281/66)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellants: Martial Ott
(Oberanven, Luxembourg), Fernando
Lopez Tola (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) et Francis Weiler (Itzig,
Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities

Forms of order sought

— Annul the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 30 June

2006 in Case F-87/05;

— Rule on the expenses, costs and fees and order the Commis-

sion to pay them.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In their appeal, the appellants claim that the Court of First
Instance committed breaches of procedure in rejecting the
application as manifestly inadmissible as regards Mr Weiler. In
addition, the applicants contend that the Civil Service Tribunal
committed breaches of procedure when considering the
substance of the pleas based on infringement of Article 45 of
the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities,
infringement of the GIP of Article 45, infringement of the prin-
ciple of non-discrimination and a manifest error of assessment.

Form of order sought by the appellant

— declare the present appeal admissible;

— annul the judgment delivered by the Civil Service Tribunal

on 28 June 2006 in Case F-39/05;

— grant the pleas for annulment and compensation submitted

by the appellant at first instance;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In her appeal, the appellant alleges, firstly, that the Tribunal
infringed Community law by an incorrect legal classification of
certain facts and, secondly, that it committed a procedural
error infringing her rights of the defence.

Appeal brought on 8 September 2006 by Chassagne
against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered
on 29 June 2006 in Case F-11/05, Chassagne v Commission

(Case T-253/06 P)

(2006/C 281/68)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Olivier Chassagne (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by
S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Appeal brought on 7 September 2006 by Beau against the
judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 28
June 2006 in Case F-39/05, Beau v Commission

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-252/06 P)

(2006/C 281/67)

Form of order sought by the appellant

Language of the case: French

The Court is asked to:

Parties

— annul the order made by the Civil Service Tribunal on 29

June 2006 in Case F-11/05;

— allow the

claims

for

annulment

and compensation

submitted by the applicant at first instance

Appellant: Marie-Yolande Beau (Paris, France) (represented by S.
Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

— order the defendant to pay the costs in their entirety.

18.11.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/39

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the first plea in his appeal, the applicant submits that the
Tribunal committed a breach of procedure adversely affecting
his right to a fair hearing in that he was not able to submit his
observations regarding the documents on which the Tribunal
based its arguments and that certain matters raised by the
applicant and documents lodged during the procedure were
not taken into consideration. By his second plea, the applicant
claims that the Tribunal infringed Community law by distorting
the pleas relied on in the action and by incorrectly interpreting
the provisions of the Staff Regulations of officials of the Euro-
pean Communities. He also submits that the Tribunal made
manifest errors of assessment of the facts.

Action brought on 15 September 2006 — Budějovický
Budvar v OHIM — Anheuser-Busch (BUD)

(Case T-255/06)

(2006/C 281/69)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Budějovický Budvar, národní podnik (České Budějo-
vice, Czech Republic) (represented by: F. Fajgenbaum, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘BUD’
for
goods in Classes 16, 21, 25 and 32 — Application No
1 257 849

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Protected designation of origin
‘BUD’ to designate beer

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 62(1) of Regulation No
40/94 (1)and Article 20 of
implementing Regulation No
2868/95 (2) in that the Board of Appeal is not competent to
rule on the validity of the designation of origin invoked by the
applicant in the context of its opposition. It further submits
that
the sign ‘BUD’ constitutes a designation of origin,
protected in both France and Austria. The applicant also
invokes misapplication of Article 8(4) of Regulation No 40/94
in that, in its view, the designation of origin ‘BUD’ is indeed a
sign used in the course of trade.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995
implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Com-
munity trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).

Action brought on 15 September 2006 — Budějovický
Budvar v OHIM — Anheuser-Busch (word mark ‘BUD’)

(Case T-257/06)

(2006/C 281/70)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Form of order sought

— annul the contested decision R 241/2005-2 of 28 June

2006 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM;

— reject application No 1 257 849 for registration of

the
Community trade mark ‘BUD’ for all of the goods which it
designates in Classes 16, 21, 25 and 32;

Parties

— send the decision of the Court of First Instance to OHIM;

— order Anheuser-Busch to pay all the costs and expenses.

Applicant: Budějovický Budvar, národní podnik (České Budějo-
vice, Czech Republic) (represented by: F. Fajgenbaum, lawyer)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Anheuser-Busch, Incor-
porated

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Anheuser-Busch, Incorporated