Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 101/50 EN Official Journal of the European Union 26.4.2003

**Action brought on 20 February 2003 by Regione Siciliana**
**against the Commission of the European Communities**

**(Case T-60/03)**

(2003/C 101/86)

_(Language of the case: Italian)_

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 20 February 2003 by Regione
Siciliana, represented by Giacomo Aiello (Avvocato dello
Stato).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Commission’s decision of 11 December 2002
(C(2002)4905) concerning the cancellation of the contribution of the European Regional Development Fund
(ERDF) towards an infrastructure investment of no less
than ECU 15 million in Italy (region: Sicily) and the
recovery of the advance paid by the Commission as part
of that contribution, and

—
order the Commission to pay the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

The present action is directed against the cancellation of the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) contribution of
LIT 94 940 620 056 towards the creation of a reservoir by
means of damming the Gibbesi River in order to ensure a
reliable water supply to the industrial centre proposed for the
Commune of Licata and to improve irrigation to an area of
approximately one thousand hectares.

In support of its application, the applicant argues infringement
of Article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, as amended by
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 of 20 July 1993
amending Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as
regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural
Funds between themselves and with the operations of the
European Investment Bank and the other existing financial
instruments ( [1] ) in that the Commission’s decision to cancel the
contribution was based on the assumption that there had been

a change in the intended use of the construction, that reason
not being included in Article 24 and inapplicable in any event
on the facts of the present case.

—
The applicant also alleges that the Commission abused its
powers by distorting the facts in that the contested
decision cancelled the Community contribution without
a proper legal basis and in the absence of factual
circumstances such as might warrant cancellation.

—
The applicant also alleges that the Commission gave an
insufficient statement of reasons on a decisive point in as
much as it found irregularities and problems in the
financial management of the project which, however,
have no relevance to the cancellation of the Community
contribution.

( [1] ) OJ L 193 of 31.7.1993, p. 20.

**Action brought on 18 February 2003 by Irwin Industrial**
**Tool Company against the Office for Harmonization in**
**the Internal Market**

**(Case T-61/03)**

(2003/C 101/87)

_(Language of the case: English)_

An action against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 18 February 2003 by Irwin
Industrial Tool Company, Hoffman Estates, USA, represented
by Mr Graham Farrington, Solicitor.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Decision of the Defendant’s Third Board of
Appeal of 20 November 2002; and

—
order the Defendant to remit the application to its
Examination Division for re-examination of Community
TradeMark number 1760867 and/or order the Defendant
to remit the application to its Board of Appeal to consider
the appeal under the provisions of Article 7(1)(b) of
Community Trade Mark Regulation EC No 40/94 which
it declined to do on the original appeal.

26.4.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 101/51

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Trade mark concerned: QUICK-GRIP. — Application
No 1760867.

Product or service: ‘Hand tools, clamps, c-clamps, bar
clamps, hold-down clamps, welding clamps, chain clamps, locking
bar clamps, locking hold-down
clamps, locking pipe clamps, pipe
clamps, part and fittings for the
aforesaid goods’ in International
Class 8.

Decision challenged Refusal of registration.
before the Board of
Appeal:

Pleas in Law relied on: Incorrect application of
Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of the Regulation No 40/94.

**Action brought on 24 February 2003 by Georges Vassila-**
**kis against Commission of the European Communities**

**(Case T-62/03)**

(2003/C 101/88)

_(Language of the case: French)_

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 24 February 2003 by Georges
Vassilakis, residing in Brussels, represented by Georgy Manalis,
lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
annul the decision of the Commission of the European
Communities, as the appointing authority, not to include
the applicant’s name in the list of officials promoted to
Grade A 5 in the 2002 exercise to promote officials from
one career to the next, as mentioned in Administrative
Information No 40-2002 of 17 May 2002;

—
annul the list of officials promoted to A 5 in the 2002
exercise to promote officials from one career to the next,
as mentioned in Administrative Information No 40-2002
of 17 May 2002, insofar as it does not include the
applicant’s name;

—
annul the implied rejection of the applicant’s complaint
of 16 July 2002;

—
order the Commission to pay the costs even in the event
that the present application is dismissed.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

In support of his arguments, the applicant alleges, first, lack of
a statement of reasons. The applicant claims furthermore that
the assessment of the comparative merits of the officials
eligible for promotion was incorrect and that it was not carried
out in relation to all the officials eligible for promotion.

**Action brought on 25 February 2003 by Fondation Alsace**
**against Commission of the European Communities**

**(Case T-65/03)**

(2003/C 101/89)

_(Language of the case: French)_

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 25 February 2003 by Fondation
Alsace, whose registered office is at Strasbourg (France),
represented by François Ruhlmann, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Commission of 20 December
2002 or, in the alternative, the preceding decision related
to it;

—
order the Commission to pay the Association Fondation
Alsace EUR 3 000 by way of preparation allowance and
costs of proceedings;

—
order the European Commission to pay all the costs of
the proceedings.

Alternatively:

—
grant the Association Fondation Alsace the longest period
possible for payment.