Case T-127/07 P: Appeal brought on 20 April 2007 by Bligny against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal made on 15 February 2007 in Case F-142/06, Bligny v Commission
Date: 2007-06-23
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European citizenship, action for annulment (EU), appeal, competition (EU), official document

C 140/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.6.2007

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Grounds of appeal: In making its decision, the Opposition Divi-
sion failed to take account of applicant's claim for annulment of
the marks relied on in opposition. In the submission of the
applícant, there is no further obstacle under Article 8(1)(b) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) to the registration being sought by
the opposing marks being
the applicant
annulled.

in the event of

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

Community Trade Mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1)

Appeal brought on 20 April 2007 by Bligny against the
order of the Civil Service Tribunal made on 15 February
2007 in Case F-142/06, Bligny v Commission

(Case T-127/07 P)

(2007/C 140/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Francesco Bligny (Tassin-la-Demi-Lune, France) (repre-
sented by P. Lebel-Nourissat, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Form of order sought by the appellant

— declare that the Civil Service Tribunal

(CST) erred in its
assessment of the application form as regards the obligation
on the candidate to attach documentary evidence of his citi-
zenship;

— declare that the CST did not deal with the applicant's pleas
as to failure to take account of the principles of the protec-
tion of legitimate expectations and of proper administration
incumbent upon the selection board of competition EPSO
AD/26/05;

— accordingly, annul the order of the CST of 15 February

2007 in Case F-142/06;

— making a new decision, annul the decision of the selection
board of competition EPSO AD/26/05 of 7 December 2006,
and that of 23 December 2006 refusing the applicant
admission to the competition and thus to correction of his
written test, and hold that the application form published
on 15 May 2006 for candidates of the competition on the
EPSO website was unlawful;

— in the alternative, refer the case back to the CST for the
purposes of a decision on the case in question and order the
Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In its appeal, the applicant requests annulment of the order of
the Civil Service Tribunal dismissing as manifestly unfounded
his action by which he requested the annulment of the decision
of the selection board of the competition refusing to correct his
written test on the ground that his application did not include
documentary evidence of his citizenship.

In support of his appeal, the applicant submits that the CST
fundamentally misread the facts which had been submitted to it,
thus misinterpreting the application form to be filled in by the
candidate,
the form.
leading to an error of assessment of
Further, he relies on a plea relating to inadequate statement of
reasons in respect of the contested order, as the CST did not
deal with all the pleas and forms of order sought put forward
by the applicant at first instance.

Action brought on 23 April 2007 — Suez v OHIM (Deli-
vering the essentials of life)

(Case T-128/07)

(2007/C 140/58)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Suez SA (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Combeau,
lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

— Annulment of the contested decision;

— OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Delivering the
essentials of life’ for goods and services in Classes 1, 9, 11, 16,
35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42 (Application No 4 102 497)

Decision of the examiner: Refusal to register