Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 55/28 EN Official Journal of the European Union 8.3.2003

—
Order the Commission to carry out the partition scheme
of bailiff M of 19 August 2002, at least in relation to the
amount of his pension, which under Belgian law has
protection against the seizure order of bailiff V of
18 March 2002;

—
Order the Commission to compensate the applicant
for the loss (including that incurred through interest
payments on bridging loans and non-material damage at
the discretion of the court, not being less than EUR 100,
together with costs incurred in enforcing his rights)
arising from the fact that, since May 2002, his pension
has been entirely deposited with bailiff M, although the
Commission is or must be aware that such conduct is
unlawful, the amount of compensation for material
damage on account of the continuing illegality to be
determined in the event of the declaration being granted.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

The applicant, a former temporary servant now in retirement,
draws a pension from the Communities. He claims that the
Commission has unlawfully made maintenance payments out
of his pension to his former wives.

The applicant argues that, in making deductions from his
pension, the Commission disregarded the prescribed legal and
administrative rules and infringed his right to a proper hearing.

**Action brought on 9 December 2002 by Wieland-Werke**
**AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
**Market (Trade Marks and Designs)**

**(Case T-367/02)**

(2003/C 55/77)

_(Language of the case: German)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
9 December 2002 by Wieland-Werke AG, Ulm (Germany),
represented by S. Gruber and F. Graf von Stosch, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
annul the decision of the defendant of 25 September
2002 in the appeal procedure R 338/2001-1;

—
order the defendant to pay the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Community trade mark Word mark ‘SnTEM’ — Appliapplied for: cation No 1421734

Goods or services: Goods in Class 6 (inter alia, metallic semi-finished products in the
form of sheets, trips, wires, tubes,
sections and rods)

Decision before the Refusal of registration by the
Board of Appeal: examiner

Decision of the Board of Dismissal of appeal
Appeal:

Pleas in law: — Infringement of
Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94
since the mark is not descriptive.

**Action brought on 9 December 2002 by Wieland-Werke**
**AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
**Market (Trade Marks and Designs)**

**(Case T-368/02)**

(2003/C 55/78)

_(Language of the case: German)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
9 December 2002 by Wieland-Werke AG, Ulm (Germany),
represented by S. Gruber and F. Graf von Stosch, lawyers.