Case T-469/07: Action brought on 21 December 2007 — Philips Lighting Poland and Philips Lighting v Council
Date: 2007-12-21
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: China, Council of the European Union, Pakistan, Philippines, Viet Nam, action for annulment (EU), anti-dumping duty, export, import, lighting equipment, originating product

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/53

Form of order sought

as the applicants' right
reasons.

to be heard and the duty to state

— Order

the annulment of

the Commission decision of
19 September 2007 concerning the non-inclusion of meth-
omyl in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the
withdrawal of authorisations for plant protection products
containing that substance;

— condemn the Community as

represented here by the
Commission to repair any damage suffered by the applicants
as a result of the contested decision and to set the amount
of this compensation for the damage suffered by the appli-
cants currently estimated at approximately EUR 52,5 million;
or any other amount reflecting the damage suffered or to be
suffered by the applicants as further established by them in
the course of this procedure especially to take due account
of future damage;

— in the alternative, order the parties to produce to the Court
within a reasonable period of time of the date of the judg-
ment figures as to the amount of the compensation arrived
at by agreement between the parties or, in the absence of
agreement, to order the parties to produce to the Court
within the same period their conclusions with detailed
figures;

— order an interest at the rate set at the time by the European
Central Bank for main refinancing operations, plus two
percentage points, or any other appropriate rate to be deter-
mined by the Court, be paid on the amount payable as from
the date of the Court's judgment until actual payment;

(1) Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the
placing of plant protection products on the market (OJ 1991 L 230,
p. 1).

(2) OJ 2007 L 255, p. 40.

Action brought on 21 December 2007 — Philips Lighting
Poland and Philips Lighting v Council

(Case T-469/07)

(2008/C 51/97)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Philips Lighting Poland S.A. (Pila, Poland) and Philips
Lighting BV (Eindhoven, Netherlands)
(represented by: M. L.
Catrain González, lawyer, and E. Wright, Barrister)

— order the defendant to pay all costs and expenses in these

proceedings.

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Pleas in law and main arguments

Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant
protection products on the market (1) provides that Member
States shall not authorise a plant protection product unless its
active substances are listed in Annex I and any conditions laid
down therein are fulfilled. The applicants seek the annulment of
Commission Decision 2007/628/EC of 19 September 2007
to
concerning the non-inclusion of methomyl
Council Directive 91/414/EEC and the withdrawal of authorisa-
tions for plant protection products containing that substance (2).
The applicants further request compensation for the alleged
damages caused by the contested decision.

in Annex I

In support of their application for annulment, the applicants
submit that the contested decision is adopted on the basis of an
incomplete and manifestly incorrect risk assessment of meth-
omyl, whereby the Commission did not take into account infor-
mation that was available to it since September 2005.

The applicants allege that the Commission misused its powers
and infringed the provisions of Directive 91/414/EEC and the
principles of proportionality,
legal
certainty, legitimate expectations and non-discrimination as well

sound administration,

Form of order sought

— Annul the contested regulation in its entirety or in so far as

it affects the applicants;

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants, who are producers of
integrated fluorescent
lamps (CFL-i) in the Community, seek the annulment of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1205/2007 of 15 October 2007 imposing
anti-dumping duties on imports of
integrated electronic
compact fluorescent lamps (CFL-i) originating in the People's
Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant
to
Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 and
extending to imports of the same product consigned from the
Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan
and the Republic of the Philippines (1).

In support of their application, the applicants submit that the
Council violated Articles 3(1), 9(4) and 11(2) of the Basic Regu-
lation (2) by imposing anti-dumping duties where it has not
been demonstrated that the expiry of the measures would be
likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of injury to the
Community industry.

C 51/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.2.2008

The applicants further allege that the Council committed an
error of law in relying on Article 9(1) of the Basic Regulation in
a situation that does not fall within the scope of that article, as
the complaint leading to the investigation had not been with-
drawn.

Finally, the applicants invoke a violation of Article 253 EC in
that the contested regulation is inadequately reasoned in respect
of the level of support from Community producers and the
conclusion on Community interest.

According to the applicant, the Board of Appeal based its deci-
sion on a purely theoretical philological analysis of the mark
applied for with regard to grammar, composition and spelling
rules as well as structure and syntax of the trade mark applied
for, completely leaving aside the overall impression of the mark
to the average consumer.

(1) OJ 2007 L 272, p. 1.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of
the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).

Action brought on 21 December

2007 — Dow

AgroSciences and Others v Commission

(Case T-475/07)

(2008/C 51/99)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 21 December 2007 — Wella v OHIM
(TAME IT)

Parties

(Case T-471/07)

(2008/C 51/98)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wella AG (Darmstadt, Germany) (represented by: B.
Klingberg, K. Sandberg, lawyers)

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

Form of order sought

— That

the decision of

the Second Board of Appeal of

24 October 2007 in Case R 713/2007-2 be annulled;

— that the defendant be ordered to bear the costs of

the

proceedings including the costs of the appeal proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Trade mark concerned: The international word mark ‘TAME IT’ for
goods in Class 3 (international registration No 879 186) —
request for EC territorial extension of protection in accordance
with the Madrid Protocol

Decision of the examiner: Refusal on absolute grounds for all the
goods applied for

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partly upheld the appeal and
allowed the EC territorial extension of the protection of interna-
tional registration No 879 186 to proceed in part

in law:

Pleas
Council Regulation 40/94.

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of

Applicants: Dow AgroSciences Ltd (Hitchin, United Kingdom),
Makhteshim-Agan Holding BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands), Makh-
teshim Agan International Coordination Center
(Brussels,
Belgium), Dintec Agroquímica — Produtos Químicos Ld.a
Italy), Dow
(Funchal, Portugal), Finchimica SpA (Manerbio,
Agrosciences BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands), Dow AgroSciences
Hungary kft (Budapest, Hungary), Dow AgroSciences Italia Srl
(Milano, Italy), Dow AgroSciences Polska sp. z o.o. (Warszawa,
Poland), Dow AgroSciences Iberica SA (Madrid, Spain), Dow
AgroSciences s.r.o. (Prague, Czech Republic), Dow AgroSciences
LLC (Indianapolis, United States), Dow AgroSciences GmbH
(Stade, Germany), Dow AgroSciences Export SAS (Mougins,
France), Dow AgroSciences SAS (Mougins, France), Dow AgroS-
ciences Danmark A/S (Lyngby-Taarbæk, Denmark), Makhteshim-
Agan Poland sp. z o.o. (Warszawa, Poland), Makhteshim-Agan
(UK) Ltd (London, United Kingdom), Makhteshim-Agan France
SARL (Sevres, France), Makhteshim-Agan Italia Srl
(Bergamo,
Italy), Alfa Agricultural Supplies SA (Halandri, Greece) (repre-
sented by: C. Mereu and K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the contested decision.

— Order the Commission to take such measures as are neces-
sary to comply with the annulment of the contested decision
in accordance with Article 233 EC,
including, but not
limited to, ordering it to request the Member State compe-
tent authorities to reinstate the relevant national trifluralin
registrations withdrawn as a result of the contested decision,
and extend any relevant deadlines as required to comply
with the judgment of the Court.

— Declare the illegality, and inapplicability to the applicants, of
the
Article 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 of
European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004
on persistent organic pollutants and amending Directive
79/117/EEC.