Case T-581/08: Action brought on 29 December 2008 — Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional v OHIM — Proton Motor Fuel Cell (PM PROTON MOTOR)
Date: 2008-12-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), equal treatment, invitation to tender, sexual discrimination

C 69/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.3.2009

— Order payment of all

legal costs, fees and disbursements,
details of which will be provided, arising out of the present
proceedings.

Action brought on 29 December 2008 — Perusahaan
Otomobil Nasional v OHIM — Proton Motor Fuel Cell
(PM PROTON MOTOR)

Pleas in law and main arguments

the loss which they consider

The applicants, who are sea-fishermen, and their union seek
they have
compensation for
suffered because of
the adoption of Commission Regulation
(EC) No 530/2008 (1) prohibiting fishing for bluefin tuna in the
Atlantic Ocean, east of longitude 45° W, and in the Mediterra-
nean Sea by purse seiners flying the Greek, French,
Italian,
Cypriot, Maltese or Spanish flag or registered in those Member
States.

In support of their action, the applicants put forward a number
of pleas in law and arguments alleging, respectively:

— breach of the principles of the Code of Conduct annexed to
the internal rules of the Commission, since the Commission
did not hold a meeting with the Syndicat des thoniers médi-
terranéens, despite having promised to do so;

— failure to compensate the applicant whose fishing activities
are prohibited even though they have not yet filled their
quota;

— that

the measures adopted by the Commission do not
constitute a mere risk inherent to the sector of activity for
which the applicants should not be compensated;

— a lack of evidence of the need for the measures adopted,
since those measures were adopted on the basis of mathe-
matical extrapolations which do not constitute proof;

(Case T-581/08)

(2009/C 69/95)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Sdn. BHD (Shah
Alam, Malaysia)
J. Blind, C. Kleiner and S.
Ziegler, lawyers)

(represented by:

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Proton
Motor Fuel Cell GmbH (Starnberg, Germany)

Form of order sought

for Harmonisation

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office
Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 9 October 2008 in case
R 1675/2007-1, uphold the opposition No 501 306 for all
goods and services and reject the application for the Com-
munity trade mark No 2 296 408; and

the

in

— Order the defendant and,

if the case might be, the other
party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay
the costs of proceedings and the costs of appeal incurred
before the defendant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

— that the measures at issue were not adopted on the basis of

a serious threat;

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The other party to the
proceedings before the Board of Appeal

— breach of the principle of legal certainty, since the Regu-
lation at issue closing fishing of bluefin tuna was adopted in
a very short time and annulled provisions which had just
opened the fishing season;

fundamental rights of

— breach of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter
the European Union (2), more
of
specifically of the right to engage in work and the right to
property.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 530/2008 of 12 June 2008 estab-
lishing emergency measures as regards purse seiners fishing for
bluefin tuna in the Atlantic Ocean, east of longitude 45° W, and in
the Mediterranean Sea (OJ 2008 L 155, p. 9).

(2) OJ 2000 C 364, p. 1.

Community
trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘PM
PROTON MOTOR’, for goods and services in classes 7, 9 and 42
— application No 2 296 408

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

sign cited: Community

trade mark registration
or
Mark
No 198 564 of
for goods and
the word mark ‘PROTON’
services in classes 12 and 37; Community trade mark registra-
tion No 1 593 201 of the figurative mark ‘PROTON’ for goods
and services in classes 12 and 37; United Kingdom trade mark
registration No 1 322 343 of the series of marks ‘PROTON’ for
services in class 37; United Kingdom trade mark registration
No 2 227 660 of the figurative mark ‘PROTON’ for goods and
services in classes 12 and 37; United Kingdom trade mark regis-
tration No 2 182 057 of the word mark ‘PROTON DIRECT’ for
goods in class 12; Registration of the word mark ‘PROTON’ in
Benelux, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Portugal
and Spain

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/43

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision
and dismissed the opposition

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regu-
lation 40/94 as the Board of Appeal wrongly assessed that there
was no likelihood of confusion between the trade marks
concerned; Infringement of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation
40/94 as the Board of Appeal failed to find that the trade mark
cited in the opposition proceedings has reputation in the United
Kingdom.

Action brought on 30 December 2008 — Carpent
Languages v Commission

(Case T-582/08)

(2009/C 69/96)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Carpent Languages SPRL (Brussels, Belgium) (repre-
sented by: P. Goergen, lawyer)

The applicant contests the decision of the Commission to reject
its tender made in respect of the call for tenders for lot No 4 of
the contract notice ‘Multiple framework contracts for meeting
and conference organisation services’ (OJ 2008 S 58-77561),
and the decision to award the contract to another tenderer. The
applicant also seeks compensation for the loss allegedly caused
by the contested decision.

In support of its action, the applicant raises three pleas in law,
alleging:

tenderer nor the advantages of

— breach of the duty to state reasons, since the Commission
the number of points obtained by the
stated neither
successful
the successful
tender over that of the applicant; furthermore, the Commis-
sion did not inform the applicant which of the two case
studies which it submitted did not obtain a sufficient
number of points;

— a manifest error of assessment,

in that

the Evaluation
Committee attributed a score of less than 70 points to one
of the case studies submitted by the applicant despite the
fact that the applicant set out in detail, in accordance with
the specifications, the approach which it would have taken
to supply the services required, the means which it would
have allocated to the different tasks, the work schedule and
an estimate of the costs;

— a breach of the principles of equal treatment and non-discri-
mination as defined in Article 89(1) of the Financial Regu-
lation, since the successful tenderer did not fulfil the selec-
tion criteria in respect of technical capacity.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Action brought on 22 December 2008 — Evropaïki
Dynamiki v Commission

Form of order sought

— Declare the action admissible and well founded;

— Accordingly, annul

the decision to reject

the applicant's

tender;

— Annul the decision awarding the contract to ADIE TECH-

NICS SPRL;

Parties

(Case T-589/08)

(2009/C 69/97)

Language of the case: English

— In the alternative, in the event that the Court does not grant
the application for annulment of
the contested decision,
order the Commission to pay the applicant the sum of
EUR 200 000 (two hundred thousand Euros) as compensa-
tion for the applicant's pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses;

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepi-
koinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece)
(represented by: N. Korogiannakis, P. Katsimani, M. Dermitzakis,
lawyers)

— Order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay all the costs.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities