Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 21/32 EN Official Journal of the European Union 24.1.2004

on-Main (Germany), represented by T. Raab-Rhein, C. Roth
and B. Karthaus, lawyers, with an address for service in
Luxembourg, against European Central Bank (Agents: V. Saintot, T. Gilliams and B. Wägenbaur), application for, first,
annulment of the pay slips sent on 13 July 2001 to the
applicants, staff of the European Central Bank (ECB), for the
month of July 2001, insofar as they are based on an increase
in basic pay of 2.2 % and, secondly, orders that the ECB send
the applicants pay slips for the month of July 2001 based on
an increase in basic pay of at least 2.7 %, or, in the alternative,
on an increase corresponding to that upheld in the Court’s
judgment in this case, and pay them the difference between
those amounts, the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber),
composed of J. Azizi, President, M. Jaeger and N. J. Forwood,
Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 20 November 2003, the operative part
of which is as follows:

1. _The pay slips sent on 13 July 2001 to the applicants, staff of_
_the European Central Bank (ECB), for the month of July 2001_
_are annulled in so far as the ECB failed to consult the staff_
_committee in adopting the salaries adjustment for the year_
_2001;_

2. _The remainder of the action is dismissed;_

3. _The European Central Bank shall pay the costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 131 of 1.6.2002.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE**

**of 4 November 2003**

**in Case T-85/02: Pedro Díaz, SA v Office for Harmonis-**
**ation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)**
**(OHIM)** ( [1] )

_**(Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Appli-**_
_**cation for Community word mark CASTILLO — Earlier**_
_**national figurative mark EL CASTILLO — Likelihood of**_
_**confusion — Similar marks already on the relevant market)**_

(2004/C 21/67)

_(Language of the case: Spanish)_

In Case T-85/02, Pedro Díaz, SA, established in Cartagena
(Spain), represented initially by P. Koch Moreno and subsequently by M. Aznar Alonso, lawyers, v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
(Agents: O. Montalto and J. Crespo Carrillo), the other party to
the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs)(OHIM) being Granjas Castelló, SA, established in

Mollerussa (Spain): Action brought against the decision of the
Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of
16 January 2002 (Case R 40/2000-3) concerning the opposition filed by the owner of the national trade mark EL
CASTILLO, the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber),
composed of: N. J. Forwood, President, J. Pirrung and
A. W. H. Meij, Judges; B. Pastor, Deputy Registrar, has given a
judgment on 4 November 2003, in which it:

1. _Dismisses the application;_

2. _Orders the applicant to pay the costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 144 of 15.6.2002.

**JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE**

**of 5 November 2003**

**in Case T-98/02, Maddalena Lebedef-Caponi v Com-**
**mission of the European Communities** ( [1] )

_**(Officials — Staff report — Performance of staff representa-**_
_**tive’s and trade union activities — Action for annulment)**_

(2004/C 21/68)

_(Language of the case: French)_

In Case T-98/02, Maddalena Lebedef-Caponi, an official of
the Commission of the European Communities, residing in
Senningerberg (Luxembourg), represented by G. Bouneou and
F. Frabetti, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
against Commission of the European Communities (Agents:
D. Martin and C. Berardis-Kayser), application for annulment
of the decision to adopt the applicant’s final staff report for
the period from 1 July 1995 to 30 June 1997, the Court of First
Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of V. Tiili, President,
P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges; I. Natsinas, Administrator,
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 5 November 2003,
the operative part of which is as follows:

1. _The decision to adopt the applicant’s final staff report for the_
_period from 1 July 1995 to 30 June 1997 is annulled._

2. _The Commission is ordered to pay the costs._

( [1] ) OJ C 144 of 15.6.2002.