Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

21.12.2002 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 323/33

—
in Case T-330/00, for annulment of the decisions of
16 March 2000 and 22 February 2000 of the authority
empowered to conclude contracts not to accept the
respective candidatures of Mr Cocchi and Mrs Hainz for
the posts declared to be vacant by vacancy notices COM/
R/5530/00 and COM/R/5500/00 respectively or, in the
alternative, annulment of those vacancy notices and for
compensation in respect of the harm allegedly suffered
by the applicants;

—
in Case T-114/01, for annulment of the decisions of
appointment adopted by the authority empowered to
conclude contracts under the recruitment procedures
initiated by vacancy notices COM/R/5530/00 and COM/
R/5500/00 and for compensation in respect of the harn
allegedly suffered by the applicants,

the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of
J.D. Cooke, President of the Chamber, R. García-Valdecasas
and P. Lindh, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 October 2002 in which
it:

1. _Dismisses the actions;_

2. _Orders all the parties to bear their own costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 372, 23.12.2000, and C 227, 11.8.2001.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE**

**of 9 October 2002**

**in Case T-360/00: Dart Industries Inc. v Office for Har-**
**monisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and**
**Designs) (OHIM)** ( [1] )

_**(Community trade mark — ‘UltraPlus’ — Absolute grounds**_
_**for refusal — Descriptive character, distinctive character —**_
_**Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)**_

(2002/C 323/52)

_(Language of the case: English)_

In Case T-360/00, Dart Industries Inc., established in Orlando,
Florida (United States of America), represented by J. Gray and
K.-U. Jonas, lawyers, v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agent: V. Melgar):
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of
Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 22 September 2000 (Case R
278/2000-1) on the registration of ‘UltraPlus’ as a Community
trade mark, the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber),

composed of: R. M. Moura Ramos, President, J. Pirrung and
A. W. H. Meij, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 October 2002, in which
it:

1. _Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office_
_for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and_
_Designs) of 22 September 2000 (Case R 278/2000-1);_

2. _Orders the defendant to pay the costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 45 of 10.2.2001.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE**

**of 9 October 2002**

**in Case T-36/01: Glaverbel v Office for Harmonisation in**
**the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)** ( [1] )

_**(Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 —**_
_**Design applied to the surface of goods — Absolute ground**_
_**for refusal — Distinctive character — Right to a hearing)**_

(2002/C 323/53)

_(Language of the case: English)_

In Case T-36/01, Glaverbel, established in Brussels (Belgium),
represented by S. Möbus, lawyer, v Office for Harmonisation
in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
(Agents: A. di Carlo and G. Schneider): Action brought against
the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) of 30 November 2000 (Case R 137/2000-1), the
Court of First Instance (Second Chamber), composed of:
R. M. Moura Ramos, President, J. Pirrung and A. W. H. Meij,
Judges; J. Palacio González, Administrator, for the Registrar,
has given a judgment on 9 October 2002, in which it:

1. _Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office_
_for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and_
_Designs) (OHIM) of 30 November 2000 (CaseR 137/2000-_
_1);_

2. _Orders the Office to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred_
_by the applicant._

( [1] ) OJ C 118 of 21.4.2001.