Case T-202/08: Action brought on 5 June 2008 — CLL Centre de langues v Commission
Date: 2008-06-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, European official, action for annulment (EU), invitation to tender, language teaching, tendering

19.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/29

Pleas in law and main arguments

By the present action, the applicant seeks the annulment of
Commission Decision C(2008) 926 final of 11 March 2008 in
Case COMP/38.453 — International Removal Services, by
which the Commission found that
certain undertakings,
including the applicant, infringed Article 81 of the EC Treaty
and Article 53 of the European Economic Area Agreement by
fixing prices in Belgium for international removal services, by
sharing part of that market and by rigging the procedure under
invitations to tender.

its allegations,

the applicant claims that

the
In support of
Commission made manifest errors of assessment and of law in
the definition of the market in question and in the evaluation of
its size and of the market shares of each of the companies in
question.

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Illinois
Tool Works Inc. (Glenview, United States)

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 3 March 2008 in case R 638/2007-2; and

— grant applicant's request for the cancellation of the Com-

munity trade mark concerned.

The applicant relies, in addition, on pleas in law alleging breach
of the duty to state the reasons for the decision, of the rights of
the defence, of the right of access to the file, of the right to fair
procedure and of the general principle of sound administration.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘FOODLUBE’ for
goods in classes 1 and 4 — registration No 1 647 734

So far as concerns the fine imposed and its amount, the appli-
cant claims that:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Refusal of the request for the
declaration of invalidity

— the Commission did not show that the practices in questions
had appreciably affected trade between the Member States;

— the amount of the find is disproportionate in relation to the
effective extent of the practices and their actual effect on the
market; and

— the practice of bogus quotes was known and accepted by
the Commission for a long time; the lack of any reaction by
the Commission led the applicant to believe that the practice
was lawful.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regu-
lation No 40/94 as the trade mark concerned is devoid of any
distinctive character; infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Council
Regulation 40/94 as the trade mark concerned is not capable of
distinguishing the indicated goods in terms of their origin.

into account,

as mitigating circumstances,

Finally, the applicant maintains that the Commission did not
take
the
concerted practice ceased long ago so far as the applicant was
concerned and that bogus quotes were a response to market
demand and not a cartel or concerted practice. The applicant
also relies on breach of the principle of equal treatment.

that

Action brought on 5 June 2008 — CLL Centre de langues v
Commission

(Case T-202/08)

(2008/C 183/55)

Language of the case: French

Action brought on 22 May 2008 — Interflon v OHIM —
Illinois Tool Works (FOODLUBE)

Parties

(Case T-200/08)

(2008/C 183/54)

Applicant: Centre de langues à Louvain-la-Neuve et -en-Woluwe
(CLL Centre de langues)
(repre-
sented by: F. Tulkens and V. Ost, lawyers)

(Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Form of order sought

— Annul the rejection decision;

Applicant: Interflon BV (Roosendaal, Netherlands) (represented
by: S. M. Wertwijn, lawyer)

— Order the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay

those incurred by CLL.

C 183/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.7.2008

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant disputes the Commission's decision to reject its
application to participate in invitation to tender ADMIN/D1/PR/
the
2008/004 regarding
European Union (EU)
in
Brussels (OJ 2008/S 44-060121), on the ground that the appli-
cation was submitted after the deadline stated in the contract
notice.

language
institutions, bodies and agencies

training

staff

for

at

In support of its action, the applicant submits that the contested
decision is based on an incorrect supposition that the awarding
authority is required to reject all late applications to participate.
The applicant takes the view, on the contrary, that the awarding
authority has a margin of discretion in that regard.

Furthermore, the applicant submits that the contested decision
is not sufficiently reasoned, since the Commission has not
explained why it has not exercised its discretionary powers.

Finally, the applicant raises a plea alleging breach of Article 123
of the implementing rules (1), according to which the number of
candidates invited to tender must be sufficient to ensure genuine
competition, and the disproportionate nature of the rejection of
the applicant's application.

(1) Commission Regulation

of
23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementa-
tion of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the
Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European
Communities (OJ L 357, p. 1).

Euratom) No

2342/2002

(EC,

Order of the Court of First Instance of 23 May 2008 —
FagorBrandt v Commission

(Case T-273/04) (1)

(2008/C 183/56)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 251, 9.10.2004.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 May 2008 —
Rath v OHIM — Sanorell Pharma (Immunocel)

(Case T-368/06) (1)

(2008/C 183/57)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 56, 10.3.2007.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 2 June 2008 —
Avaya v OHIM — ZyXEL Communications (VANTAGE
CNM)

(Case T-171/07) (1)

(2008/C 183/58)

Language of the case: English

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be
removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 June 2008 —
Malheiro v Commission

(Case T-228/07) (1)

(2008/C 183/59)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 24, 8.9.2007.