Case T-326/06: Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 — Total v OHIM — Peterson (Beverly Hills Formula TOTAL PROTECTION)
Date: 2007-09-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/57

economic

interest of

accessibility of banks

By its third plea, the applicant claims that the Commission
made a manifest error of assessment in the application of the
third condition of Article 86(2) EC in finding that the service of
is
general
intended only for persons having particular difficulties with
access to basic banking services. It alleges that the Commission
exceeded its powers of control of the definition of a service of
general economic interest and, in any event, applied an overly
restrictive definition of the mission of accessibility to banking.
According to the applicant, the Commission also made a mani-
fest error of assessment in the application of the second condi-
tion of Article 86(2) EC relating to the obligation to award the
contract for a service by an act of State, and also in the applica-
tion of the third and fourth conditions of that article. It alleges
that the Commission made an error in the calculation of the
impact of the abolishment of the special rights for the public
finances and that it made a manifest error of assessment in the
application of the principle of proportionality in finding that
there are other, less restrictive means for the freedom of estab-
lishment than the granting of special rights in order to ensure
balanced financing of services of general economic interest such
as accessibility of banking and financing of social housing.

By its fourth plea, the applicant claims that the Commission
made a manifest error of assessment in finding that the special
rights in question were incompatible with Article 49 EC.

The fifth plea relied on by the applicant alleges a failure to state
reasons in the contested decision.

Appeal brought on 24 July 2007 by the Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal
delivered on 22 May 2007 in Case F-97/06, López Teruel v
OHIM

(Case T-284/07 P)

(2007/C 211/105)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Form of order sought by the appellant

— annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 22 May

2007 delivered in Case F-97/06;

— make an appropriate order as to costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the judgment of 22 May 2007, the annulment of which is
sought in this appeal, the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) annulled
the decision of OHIM of 6 October 2005 refusing the applica-
tion brought by Ms López Teruel for an Invalidity Committee to
be convened.

In support of the appeal for annulment of that judgment, OHIM
raises three pleas.

infringement of

The first plea alleges
statutory provisions
relating to the convening of an Invalidity Committee, in that the
CST equated the conditions for entitlement
to an invalidity
pension with the conditions for the convening of an Invalidity
Committee. The appellant also disputes that there is a manda-
tory duty on the part of the Appointing Authority as regards
convening such a committee and submits that the judgment of
the CST is therefore vitiated by an error of interpretation.

The second plea alleges infringement of Article 90 of the Staff
Regulations and an error of law as regards the assessment of
the contested decision, in that the CST considered the decision
of 6 October 2005 to be the only act adversely affecting an offi-
cial and treated as a confirmatory act the decision of OHIM
responding to the complaint made against that decision.

Thirdly, OHIM submits that the CST clearly distorted the facts
and the evidence in holding that the Office based its decision on
the results of the examination of the applicant by an indepen-
dent doctor on 18 October 2005.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2007 —
Total v OHIM — Peterson (Beverly Hills Formula TOTAL
PROTECTION)

(Case T-326/06) (1)

(2007/C 211/106)

Language of the case: English

Appellant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(represented by I. de Medrano Caballero and E.
(OHIM)
Maurage, Agents)

The President of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) has
ordered that the case be removed from the register.

Other party to the proceedings: Adelaida López Teruel (Guadalajara,
Spain)

(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.