Case T-252/08: Action brought on 26 June 2008 — Tipik v Commission
Date: 2008-06-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, Internet site, action for annulment (EU), award of contract, consortium, information technology, invitation to tender

C 209/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

15.8.2008

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition in
its entirety

or administrative action in Member States concerning the
pursuit of television broadcasting activities.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8 of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the trade marks concerned are visually and phone-
tically similar and the goods and services covered by the trade
marks concerned are identical;
infringement of Article 8 of
Council Regulation No 40/94 as the use of the trade mark
applied for is likely to cause confusion.

Action brought on 18 June 2008 — Batchelor v
Commission

(Case T-250/08)

(2008/C 209/113)

Language of the case: English

that

The applicant claims
the contested decision violates
Article 253 EC and Articles 7(1) and 8(1) of the Access Regu-
lation and thus is vitiated by an infringement of an essential
procedural requirement, namely, by failing to give sufficient
reasons for denial of access to the documents requested. The
applicant further submits that, in denying access to the docu-
ments requested, the contested decision violates Article 255 EC
and Articles 1(a), 2(1) and (3), 4(1) to (6) of the Access Regu-
lation. In particular, the applicant contends that the contested
decision infringes the Access Regulation in holding that the
exceptions under the second paragraph of Article 4(3) and of
the first and third indents of Article 4(2) thereof applied and,
finally, that the contested decision infringes Article 4(6) of the
Access Regulation in failing to provide reasons for the refusal of
partial access to the documents requested.

(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 2001 L 145,
p. 43).

Parties

Action brought on 26 June 2008 — Tipik v Commission

Applicant: Edward William Batchelor (Brussels, Belgium) (repre-
sented by:
and
D. Reymond, lawyer)

F. Young, Solicitor, A. Barav, Barrister,

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

(Case T-252/08)

(2008/C 209/114)

Language of the case: French

— Annul the implied negative decision deemed, pursuant to
Article 8(3) of the Access Regulation, to have been made by
the European Commission on 9 April 2008 and the express
negative decision made by the Commission on 16 May
2008,
to documents
presented pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the
European Parliament and the Council of 30 May 2001
regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and
Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43);

relating to a request

for access

Parties

Applicant: Tipik Communication Agency SA (Brussels, Belgium)
(represented by: E. Gillet, L. Levi and C. Dubois, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

— Order the Commission to pay its own costs and the costs
incurred by the applicant in relation to these proceedings.

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

This application for annulment under Article 230 EC is directed
against the Commission's implied decision of 9 April 2008 and
its express decision of 16 May 2008, made pursuant to Regu-
lation (EC) No 1049/2001 (1)
(‘the Access Regulation’), by
which the Commission rejected the applicant's request for access
to documents relating to the notification of measures taken
under Article 3a(1) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the
coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation

— Annul the decision of the Commission, the date of which is
the tender
unknown, by which it was decided to reject
submitted by the applicant in the award procedure for the
public service contract concerning, inter alia, the EUROPA
Internet site (PO/2007-31/C2);

— Annul the decision of the Commission, the date of which is
unknown, by which it was decided to award that public
contract to the consortium led by the company European
Service Network;

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/65

— Order the defendant to indemnify the applicant for the loss
suffered by reason of the adoption of those irregular deci-
sions, which amounts to EUR 5 063 773,29, together with
late-payment interest to run from the date of the judgment
to be delivered by the Court of First Instance until payment
in full. The rate of late-payment interest to be applied is to
be calculated on the basis of the rate fixed by the European
Central Bank for main refinancing operations, applicable
during the period concerned, increased by three points;

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Action brought on 16 June 2008 — Eugenia Montero
Padilla v OHIM — Padilla Requena (JOSE PADILLA)

(Case T-255/08)

(2008/C 209/115)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: Eugenia Montero Padilla (Madrid, Spain) (represented
by: G. Aguillaume Gandasegui and P. Linde Puelles, lawyers)

Parties

The applicant contests the decision of the Commission to reject
its tender submitted in the context of the invitation to tender
for the contract entitled ‘Communication via EUROPA — the
official website of the EU and other online and printed informa-
tion and communication products managed by the Directorate-
General Communication of
the European Commission —
editorial, graphical and technical and translation assistance in
design, production and maintenance’ (OJ 2007/S 193-234221),
and the decision to award the contract to the consortium led by
the applicant seeks
European Service Network.
compensation for
the loss allegedly caused by the errors
committed by the Commission.

In addition,

In support of its action, the applicant submits, principally, that
the Commission should have excluded the consortium led by
European Service Network from the procedure for the award of
the contract, since one of the members of that consortium had
been declared to be in serious breach of its contractual obliga-
tions in respect of a contract intended for services of OPOCE
similar to those which are the subject-matter of the contract at
issue.

In the alternative, the applicant submits that the Commission
has committed a manifest error of assessment when examining
the tender submitted by the consortium led by European Service
Network in that it awarded to it the same mark as the applicant
for the quality criterion, although it could not be certain as to
the capacity of that consortium to supply satisfactory technical
solutions in that regard.

the Commission liable since, on the one hand,

The applicant submits that those irregularities are such as to
it
render
committed an error and, on the other, it seriously and mani-
festly disregarded the limits imposed on its discretion.

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
José María Padilla Requena

Form of order sought

Annul OHIM's decision of 1 March 2008 and order that the
application for registration be refused in respect of Community
trade mark ‘JOSE PADILLA’ for Classes 9a, 23a and 41a.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Eugenia Montero Padilla

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘JOSE PADILLA’
(registration application No 2.844.066) for goods and services
in Classes 9, 25 and 41.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: the
applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word mark ‘JOSE PADILLA’
(registration application No 2.844.066) for goods and services
in Class 41.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Dismissal of the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Incorrect application of Articles 4 and 7(1)(a),(b),(c)
and (f) Article 8(1) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the
Community trade mark.