Case T-364/07: Action brought on 17 September 2007 — Thomson Sales Europe v Commission
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: CCT duties, European Commission, Thailand, action for annulment (EU), anti-dumping duty, import, redemption, television equipment

C 283/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.11.2007

Pleas in law and main arguments

— reserve the costs;

By judgment of 5 July 2007 delivered in Case F-24/06 Abarca
Montiel and Others v Commission,
the Civil Service Tribunal
annulled the decisions by which the Commission fixed the clas-
sification and remuneration of
their
the applicants under
contracts as members of
the contract staff. The applicants,
former salaried employees under Belgian law, were taken on as
nursery attendants following a change in the conditions of
employment of other servants of the Communities.

The Commission's first plea in support of its appeal alleges an
error of law by the Tribunal in so far as it failed to have proper
regard for the scope of the principle of equality of treatment in
its interpretation of the applicable provisions, in particular with
regard to the approach followed by the Commission of
including family allowances in the concept of remuneration.

The second plea alleges infringement of
the principle that
reasons must be stated in so far as the Civil Service Tribunal
failed to rule on the concept of remuneration.

Appeal brought on 19 July 2007 by Commission of the
European Communities against the judgment of the Civil
Service Tribunal delivered on 5 July 2007 in Case F-25/06,
Ider and Others v Commission

(Case T-361/07 P)

(2007/C 283/59)

Language of the case: French

— in the alternative, annul the judgment of the Civil Service
Tribunal of 5 July 2007 in Case F-25/06 and, in determining
the present case itself, grant the forms of order sought by
the defendant at first instance, and therefore, dismiss the
action in Case F-25/06; order the defendant in the appeal to
pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By judgment of 5 July 2007 in Case F-25/06, Ider and Others v
Commission, the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) annulled the deci-
sion by which the Commission fixed Ms Ider's remuneration
under a contract for a member of the contract staff. The appli-
cants,
salaried employees under Belgian law, were
engaged as temporary members of staff entrusted with executive
duties following a change to the regime applicable to other
servants of the Communities.

former

The Commission's first plea in support of its appeal alleges an
error of law in that the Civil Service Tribunal misconstrued the
scope of the principle of equal treatment in its interpretation of
the applicable provisions, in particular in relation to the defini-
tion used by the Commission to include family allowances in
the definition of remuneration.

The second plea alleges breach of the principle of the obligation
to state reasons in that the Civil Service Tribunal did not rule
on the concept of remuneration.

Action brought on 17 September 2007 — Thomson Sales
Europe v Commission

Parties

Appellant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: D. Martin and L. Lozano Palacios, Agents)

Ider (Halle, Belgium), M.-C.
Other party to the proceedings: B.
Desorbay (Meise, Belgium) and L. Noschese (Braine-le-Château,
Belgium)

(Case T-364/07)

(2007/C 283/60)

Language of the case: French

Form of order sought by the appellant

Parties

— Annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 5 July

2007 in Case F-25/06;

Applicant: Thomson Sales Europe (Boulogne-Billancourt, France)
(represented by: F. Goguel and F. Foucault, lawyers)

— refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal;

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/33

Form of order sought

Action brought on 17 September 2007 — Traxdata France
v OHIM — Ritrax (TRAXDATA, TEAM TRAXDATA)

— Annul the Commission decision of 20 July 2007;

— Rule that

the applicant

is entitled to exemption from
post-clearance recovery of anti-dumping duties pursuant to
Article 220(2)(b) of the Community Customs Code (1) and
to Article 871 et seq. of Regulation No 2454/93 (2).

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant seeks annulment of the
decision which it claims is contained in a Commission letter of
20 July 2007 stating that the Commission lacks the competence
to rule on the applicant's request to the French authorities that
it be exempted from post-clearance recovery of duties on the
importation of colour
television receivers manufactured in
Thailand. The applicant's request was forwarded to the Commis-
sion by the French authorities as an annex to the application
the Community Customs Code
based on Article 239 of
concerning the remission of import duties (3).

The applicant claims that the Commission was also under an
obligation to rule on the application based on Article 220(2)(b)
of the Community Customs Code and, by way of a separate
letter, requested it to take a decision. In the present action, the
applicant contests a decision which it claims is contained in the
Commission letter addressed to it in response to its own letter.

The applicant claims that
the Commission erred in law by
finding that the French authorities had referred the case to it
exclusively on the basis of Article 239 of
the Community
Customs Code, given that, according to the applicant, the docu-
ments received by the Commission met the requirements of
Article 871 et seq. of Regulation No 2454/93. The applicant
takes the view that the Commission is under an obligation to
examine whether
of
Article 220(2)(b) of the Community Customs Code were met in
this case, particularly in view of the fact that it had decided to
reject its request for remission based on Article 239 of the
Code.

application

conditions

the

for

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 estab-

lishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1).

(2) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying
down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993
L 253, p. 1).

(3) Decision of the Commission of 7 May 2007 ruling on that applica-
tion and indicating to the French authorities that it was not justified
in the applicant's case to accord remission of the duties on importa-
tion which were the subject of an action for annulment before the
Court of First Instance in Case T-225/07 Thomson Sales Europe v
Commission (notice published in OJ C 211, 8.9.2007, p. 36).

(Case T-365/07)

(2007/C 283/61)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Traxdata France SARL (Paris, France) (represented by:
F. Valentin, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ritrax
Corp. Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

Form of order sought

— Reverse the decision of 23 May 2007 handed down by the
the Office for Harmonisation
First Board of Appeal of
in the Internal Market
in joined cases R 1337/2005-1,
R 1338/2005-1, R 1339/2005-1 and R 1340/2005-1 and
to accordingly declare the invalidity of TRAXDATA CTMs
No 000007393, No 000877779, No 001252725 and
TEAM TRAXDATA No 000877910 for all of the products
and services listed in classes 9, 16 and 42, on the basis of
Article 52(1)(c) of the CTMR of 20 December 1993;

— pronounce

the

invalidity of TEAM TRAXDATA CTM
No 000877910, for the following services listed in class 36:
‘Financial sponsorship of sports and leisure activities; finan-
cial sponsorship of sporting competitions, events and teams;
financial sponsorship of sportsmen and sportswomen […]
advice and consultancy services in relation to all the afore-
said services’;

— pronounce

of

the

invalidity

TRAXDATA

CTMs
No 000877779 and TEAM TRAXDATA No 000877910,
for the following services listed in class 41:
‘entertainment
and education services; arranging and conducting of confer-
ences, congresses, seminars, symposiums,
[…] electronic
game services provided by means of the Internet; publishing
of books, magazines and periodicals; […] amusement centre
services;
rental of video cassettes, audio cassettes,
compact discs and cine films; advice and consultancy
services relating to all the aforesaid services.’

[…]