Case T-102/08 P: Appeal brought on 25 February 2008 by Asa Sundholm against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 13 December 2007 in Case F-27/07 Sundholm v Commission
Date: 2008-02-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action by staff, appeal, professional career, regulations for civil servants, staff assessment

C 107/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

26.4.2008

— Infringement of Articles 73 and 74 of Regulation No 40/94
as there is no or an insufficient statement of reasons for the
contested decision and the facts have not been examined
sufficiently

— Misuse of powers as the defendant took extraneous consid-
erations into account in its statement of reasons for the
contested decision in respect of the requirement of avail-
ability.

(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 25 February 2008 by Asa Sundholm
against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered
on 13 December 2007 in Case F-27/07 Sundholm v
Commission

(Case T-102/08 P)

(2008/C 107/64)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Asa Sundholm (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by S.
Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal, lawyers)

by which she sought the annulment of the Commission's deci-
sion drawing up her Career Development Report for the period
from 1 July 2001 to 31 December 2002, since the first report
for that period was annulled by the judgment of the Court of
First Instance of 20 April 2005 (1).

in law alleging an error of

In support of her appeal the appellant puts forward a single
plea
infringement of
Article 233 EC and failure to comply with Community law in
relation to the special obligation to state reasons.

law,

She claims that the CST erred in law by disregarding the scope
of the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 April 2005
and of Article 233 EC in holding that the Appointing Authority
was not
required, when taking the necessary measures to
comply with the judgment and in taking account of its grounds
and the time lapse between the annulled decision and that
adopted pursuant to that judgment, to provide a more extensive
statement of reasons in respect of the obligation on the adminis-
tration to state reasons in a specific manner for a Development
Report drawn up pursuant to a judgment of the Court of First
Instance and, according to the appellant, out of time.

In addition, she submits that the CST disregarded the force of
res judicata with absolute effect of a judgment of the Court of
First
the
comments unlawfully taken into consideration constitutes a fair
rectification of the evaluation of the appellant.

Instance by accepting that

the mere deletion of

(1) Case T-86/04 Sundholm v Commission, not published in the ECR.

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Action brought on 23 February 2008 — ars Parfum
Creation & Consulting v OHIM (shape of a perfume bottle)

Form of order sought by the appellant

— quash the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second

Chamber) of 13 December 2007 in Case F-27/07;

— give judgment again and do what the first court ought to
have done: annul the decision drawing up the applicant's
for the period from 1 July
Career Development Report
2001 to 31 December 2002, adopted pursuant to the judg-
ment of the Court of First Instance of 20 April 2005;

(Case T-104/08)

(2008/C 107/65)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

— order the defendant to pay the costs at first instance and on

Parties

appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: ars Parfum Creation & Consulting GmbH (Cologne,
Germany) (represented by: A. Späth and G. Hasselblatt, lawyers)

In her appeal, the appellant seeks the setting aside of the judg-
ment of the Civil Service Tribunal (CST) dismissing the action

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