Case T-379/07: Action brought on 3 October 2007 — Poland v Commission
Date: 2007-11-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Baltic Sea, European Commission, Poland, action for annulment (EU), catch quota, fishing regulations, fishing rights

C 283/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.11.2007

Form of order sought

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

— annul the decision by EPSO of 27 June 2007 and its implied
decision to reject the applicant's confirmatory application of
10 July 2007, relating to his right to access to EPSO docu-
ments;

— order EPSO to send to him (i) a true copy of the questions
put to him and his answers at the two preliminary tests (a)
and (b) when he took part
in the Open Competition
EPSO/AD/77/06 (OJ C 277 A, p. 1) to constitute a reserve
list for recruitment by the European institutions of adminis-
trator linguists (AD 5) having Greek as main language, in
the field of translation and (ii) a true copy of the list of
correct answers to those two preliminary tests taken by him;

— order the Commission of the European Communities and

EPSO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the refusal of the European Personnel
Selection Office (EPSO) to provide to him a true copy of the
questions put to him and his answers at the two preliminary
tests (a) and (b) when he took part in the Open Competition
EPSO/AD/77/06 (OJ C 277 A, p. 1) and a true copy of the list
of the correct answers to those preliminary tests taken by him,
is a decision which is unlawful and insufficiently justified, given
that it infringes his right to access to the documents of the
European institutions under Article 255 EC and Articles 2 and
4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1), and that the statement
of its reasons is very vague and infringes Article 253 EC. At the
same time, according to the applicant, the refusal of EPSO to
produce the above documents is contrary to the principles of
legal certainty and the
transparency, proper administration,
protection of the legitimate expectations of citizens.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145,p. 43).

Action brought on 3 October 2007 — Poland v
Commission

(Case T-379/07)

(2007/C 283/69)

Language of the case: Polish

Form of order sought

— declare invalid Commission Regulation (EC) No 804/2007
of 9 July 2007 establishing a prohibition of fishing for cod
in the Baltic Sea (Subdivisions 25-32, EC Waters) by vessels
flying the flag of Poland (1);

— order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks a declaration that Commission Regulation
(EC) No 804/2007 of 9 July 2007 establishing a prohibition of
fishing for cod in the Baltic Sea (Subdivisions 25-32, EC Waters)
by vessels flying the flag of Poland is invalid. The contested
regulation provides that, as from 11 July 2007, the part of the
catch quota for cod allocated to the applicant for 2007 in the
Baltic Sea is deemed to have been exhausted and prohibits, for
the period from 11 July 2007 to 31 December 2007, further
fishing for cod in that area by vessels flying the Polish flag and
the retention on board, transhipment or landing of cod caught
by such vessels.

In support of its contention, the applicant accuses the Commis-
sion of committing flagrant mistakes in calculating the quanti-
ties of cod landed by Polish fishing vessels and alleges a breach
of Council Regulation (EC) No 1941/2006 of 11 December
2006 fixing the fishing opportunities and associated conditions
for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in
the Baltic Sea for 2007 (2). In the context of the present head of
complaint the applicant submits that the Commission based its
findings in respect of the amounts of cod caught by Polish
fishing vessels on data which,
in the applicant's opinion, are
arbitrary and unrepresentative, derived from inspections carried
out by the Commission's own inspectors and in disregard of
data from the Polish Sea Fishing Information System.

further submits that

the contested regulation
The applicant
infringes the principle of proportionality inasmuch as,
in its
view, the prohibition of catches which it introduces gives rise to
fundamental unfavourable socio-economic effects which are
than the hypothetical advantages with
significantly greater
regard to the conservation of cod stocks. The applicant accuses
those effects
the Commission of
before it adopted the contested regulation and of
failing to
consider the possibility of attaining the objectives pursued by
using means which would be less detrimental to the society and
economy of maritime areas.

foregoing an appraisal of

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: T. Nowakowski,
Agent)

In the grounds of its action the applicant also argues that the
contested regulation is inadequately reasoned and that this, in
its opinion, makes it impossible to verify the expediency and
legality of the prohibition which it introduces.

24.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/39

The applicant also alleges infringement of the principle of soli-
darity and genuine cooperation, and criticises the Commission
for failing to engage in dialogue and not making it possible for
to clarify certain contentious issues before it
the applicant
adopted the contested regulation.

The applicant concludes by contending that the contested regu-
lation infringes the right freely to exercise an economic activity
introduces
inasmuch as the prohibition of catches which it
affects persons who are unable in practical terms to alter the
type of activity which they pursue and for whom fishing is their
only means of subsistence, a fortiori as that prohibition is total
and does not allow of any exceptions.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: national mark ‘Roland Garros’ for
goods in Classes 3, 16, 18, 22, 25, 28, 32, 41 and 42.

Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition upheld for all the
goods in dispute.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal brought by the applicant
deemed not filed by reason of the late payment of the appeal
fee.

(1) OJ 2007 L 180, p. 3.
(2) OJ 2006 L 367, p. 1.

Action brought on 27 September 2007 — Italy v
Commission

Action brought on 25 September 2007 — Kaloudis v
OHIM — Fédération Française de Tennis (Roland Garros
SPORTSWEAR)

(Case T-380/07)

(2007/C 283/70)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

(Case T-381/07)

(2007/C 283/71)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: P. Gentili, Avvocato
dello Stato)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Form of order sought

Applicant: Dimitrios Kaloudis (Dassia-Corfu, Greece) (represented
by: G. Kaloudis, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Fédération Française de Tennis

Form of order sought

— Annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM

of 19 July 2007;

— Allow the application for

the Community trade mark

Roland Garros SPORTSWEAR No 3114477 for Class 25;

— Order the other party to the proceedings before the Board

of Appeal to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: figurative mark ‘Roland Garros
SPORTSWEAR’
in Class 25 — application
No 3114477.

goods

for

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
Fédération Française de Tennis

— annul Memorandum No 007584 of 18 July 2007 of the
European Commission, Directorate-General
for Regional
Policy — Programmes and projects in Cyprus, Greece,
Italy, Malta and the Netherlands, concerning
Hungary,
payments made by the Commission which differ from the
amount requested. Ref. DOCUP Toscana Ob. 2 (No CCI 2000
IT 16 2DO 001);

— annul Memorandum No 009059 of 21 August 2007 of the
European Commission, Directorate-General
for Regional
Policy — Programmes and projects in Cyprus, Greece,
Hungary, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands, concerning certifi-
cation and the intermediate statement of expenses and claim
for payment. Ref. DOCUP Veneto Ob. 2 2000-2006
(No CCI 2000 IT 16 2DO 005);

— annul Memorandum No 009061 of 21 August 2007 of the
for Regional
European Commission, Directorate-General
Policy — Programmes and projects in Cyprus, Greece,
Hungary,
Italy, Malta and the Netherlands, concerning
payments made by the Commission which differ from the
amount requested. Ref. DOCUP Ob. 2 ‘Lazio’ 2000-2006
(No CCI 2000 IT 16 2DO 009);

— annul Memorandum No 009249 of 29 August 2007 of the
European Commission, Directorate-General
for Regional
Policy — Programmes and projects in Cyprus, Greece,
Italy, Malta and the Netherlands, concerning
Hungary,
payments made by the Commission which differ from the
amount
requested. Ref. DOCUP Piemonte 2000-2006
(No CCI 2000 IT 16 2DO 007);