Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 303/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 27.10.2001

a company duly organized and incorporated under the laws of The Commission’s argument that the applicant’s copyright is a
the State of Delaware (USA), represented by Nicholas Levy, prerequisite for entering the market is, according to the
John Temple Lang and Robert O’Donoghue, of Cleary, Gottlieb, applicant, also incorrect and based on a misinterpretation of
Steen & Hamilton, Brussels (Belgium). the facts. The applicant states that its competitors are using a
different structure to present the information and that newcomers in the market are free to develop their own structure.
The applicant claims that its ‘1 860 brick structure’ is not the
The applicant claims that the Court should:
_de facto_ industry standard, but merely the format used by the
leading data services provider.

—
annul the decision of the Commission of 3 July 2001,
ordering interim measures in case COMP D3/38044,
The applicant further claims that there is no _prima facie_ case to
justify the ordering of an interim measure. Also, the Comalternatively mission has erred in weighing the interests involved for the
purposes of ordering the interim measures. According to the
applicant, the grant of a licence would cause irreparable

—
annul the decision insofar as it requires IMS Health to damage to its business and render its intellectual property
license the 1 860 Brick Structure to companies currently rights devoid of all purpose.
present on the German market for regional sales data
services and specifies the conditions under which the
negotiation of licence terms is to be conducted and The applicant further claims that the Commission has violated
approved by the Commission, the applicant’s rights of defence during the preliminary
procedure.

and, in any event,

—
order the Commission to pay IMS Health’s legal costs and
expenses in relation to this matter;

—
adopt all such further measures as the Court may consider
**Action brought on 5 August 2001 by Vassilios Tsarnavas**
appropriate.
**against the Commission of the European Communities**

**(Case T-189/01)**

_Pleas in law and main arguments_
(2001/C 303/34)

_(Language of the case: French)_
The applicant provides regional sales data in Germany to
pharmaceutical companies. It has developed in that connection
a specific presentation of this information, called the
‘1 860 brick structure’, of which the applicant holds the An action against the Commission of the European Communiintellectual property rights in Germany. ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 August 2001 by Vassilios
Tsarnavas, resident in Brussels, represented by Nicolas Lhoëst,
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.
The Commission has ordered an interim measure relating to a
proceeding against the applicant under Article 82 of the EC
Treaty, requiring the applicant to grant licences for the use of The applicant claims that the Court should:
the ‘1 860 brick structure’ to third parties currently present on
the German market for the provision of regional sales data. —
annul the decision adopted by the Commission on
That measure is currently contested by the applicant.
22 September 2000 in that it decides that the applicant’s
name should not be included on the list of grade A 5
officials considered the most deserving of promotion
under the 1999 promotion procedure and, as a result,
In support of its application, the applicant claims that the
that the applicant should not be promoted to grade A 4
Commission has violated the protection granted by national
under the 1999 promotions procedure;
and international law to its intellectual property rights. The
right to refuse access to one’s intellectual property constitutes,

—
according to the applicant, the essence of intellectual property in so far as necessary, annul the Commission’s implied
rights. Such a refusal is not therefore contrary to Article 82 decision rejecting the complaint submitted by the appliEC, unless it is accompanied by additional conduct. Such cant on 27 December 2000 under Article 90(2) of the
conduct is, according to the applicant, not present in this case. Staff Regulations;

27.10.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303/21

— —
consequently annul the 1999 A 4 promotions procedure Managium, relating to the Biogaz, Solaire Bioclimawith regard to the applicant; tique and Biogaz contracts is unlawful, since those
invoices cover the services actually provided by the

—
order the defendant to pay all the costs of the action. applicant’s Managing Director in accordance with
the work programme;

and consequently declare that the fees charged by Deira
_Pleas in law and main arguments_
and Managium must be accepted;

—
In support of his action, the applicant puts forward the same declare that the decision terminating the Photovoltaic
pleas in law as in Case T-188/01. In addition the applicant SME/1883/98-EU contract is unlawful;
alleges non-compliance with the promotions procedure.
and consequently declare that the Commission has no
legal right to claim repayment of the advance of
36 000 Euros paid by way of financial contribution;

—
declare that the Commission’s decision retroactively
terminating the Transport DIS/1178/1997-BE Agreement
**Action brought on 14 August 2001 by the Groupement** is unlawful;
**européen d’intérêt économique Lior against the Com-**
**mission of the European Communities** and consequently declare that the Commission has no
legal right to claim repayment of the initial advance of
36 000 Euros paid by way of financial contribution, and
**(Case T-192/01)**
that the contract should run its term;

(2001/C 303/35)
A s r e g a r d s t h e A l t e n e r A g o r e s X V I I /
4 1 0 3 0 / Z / 9 9 - 0 8 5 c o n t r a c t
_(Language of the case: French)_

—
order the Commission to pay the sum of 68 070 Euros,
An action against the Commission of the European Communi- representing the final instalment of its financial contrities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the bution, together with interest at the statutory rate from
European Communities on 14 August 2001 by the Groupe- the date of the letter of 23 July 2001 giving formal notice
ment européen d’intérêt économique Lior, established in to pay;
Brussels, represented by Véronique Marien and Joëlle Choucroun, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg. A s r e g a r d s t h e T h e r m i e a n d A l t e n e r c o n t r a c t s

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
order the Commission to compensate the applicant for
I n t h e c o n t e x t o f p e r f o r m a n c e o f T h e r m i e the damage suffered in the context of the performance of
c o n t r a c t s all of the Thermie and Altener contracts, initially estimated, on a fair and equitable basis, to amount to the
— sum of 1 million Euros, subject to increase or decrease in
order the European Commission to pay the final instalthe course of proceedings;
ment of its financial contribution, namely:

— for the Biomasse SME/1539/97 contract: — order the Commission to pay all the costs.
40 500 Euros

— for the Windenergy SME/792/96 contract:
36 000 Euros,
_Pleas in law and main arguments_

together with interest at the statutory rate from the date
of the letter of 6 July 2001 giving formal notice to pay
until payment in full; The applicant in the present case, a European economic
interest grouping with 10 members representing 4 countries
— of the European Union, concluded several contracts with the
declare that the Commission’s decision rejecting the
invoices of its members Commission under the Thermie Programme, Section B, with
the aim of creating CD-ROMs concerning:

—
Deira, relating to all of the Thermie contracts, is

—
unlawful, in that it is based on a non-contractual the management of biogas obtained from waste and
audit of its accounts; waste-water treatment (Biogaz SME/003/95-BE contract);