CELEX: C2003/171/50
Language: en
Date: 2003-07-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-108/03: Action brought on 24 March 2003 by Elisabeth von Pezold against the Commission of the European Communities

19.7.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                             C 171/29
Action brought on 24 March 2003 by Elisabeth von                           limit, which favours undertakings of less than 20 hectares, also
Pezold against the Commission of the European Com-                         results in severe distortion of competition, in contravention of
                              munities                                     Article 35 of Regulation No 1257/1999 ( 1).
                         (Case T-108/03)                                   (1 ) Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on
                                                                                support for rural development from the European Agricultural
                                                                                Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and
                                                                                repealing certain Regulations (OJ L 160, 26.06.1999, p. 80).
                         (2003/C 171/50)
                  (Language of the case: German)
                                                                           Action brought on 10 April 2003 by Synopharm GmbH
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                  & Co. KG against the Office for Harmonisation in the
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                           Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
European Communities on 24 March 2003 by Elisabeth von
Pezold, residing in Pöls (Austria), represented by R. von Pezold,                                     (Case T-120/03)
lawyer.
                                                                                                      (2003/C 171/51)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                           (Language of the case to be determined in accordance with
                                                                           Article 131(2) of the Rules of Procedure — Language in which the
—     annul the approval of point 6.2.1.4.1. of the guidelines                               application was submitted: German)
      on the implementation of the ‘other measures’ forming
      part of the Austrian rural development programm
      ZI.21.200/50-II/00 of 27 July 2000, C III in Section 6,
      headed ‘Forestry’, granted by the Commission decision of             An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
      14 July 2000 approving a rural development program-                  Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
      ming document for the Republic of Austria for the period             Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
      from 2000 to 2006 (C(2000) 1973 final);                              10 April 2003 by Synopharm GmbH & Co. KG, Barsbüttel
                                                                           (Germany), represented by G. J. Hodapp, lawyer. Pentafarma-
                                                                           Sociedade Técnico-Medicinal, LDA, Sacavém (Portugal) was
—     in the alternative, if it finds that point 6.2.1.4.1. of those
                                                                           also a party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
      guidelines has not been approved by the Commission,
      deliver a judgment to that effect;
                                                                           The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.
                                                                           —      annul Decision R 44/2002-3 of the Third Board of
                                                                                  Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                                  Market of 15 January 2003 in so far as the appeal was
                                                                                  dismissed;
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                           —      order the Office to pay the costs.
The applicant owns a forestry undertaking with forests cover-
ing approximately 3 500 hectares. She submits that                         Pleas in law and main arguments
point 6.2.1.4.1. of the Austrian guidelines on the implemen-
tation of the ‘rural development programm’ limits applications
for support for forests to a maximum of 20 hectares per                    Applicant for Com-               The applicant
undertaking, and that this limit was approved by the contested             munity trade mark:
decision.
                                                                           Community trade mark             The word mark ‘DERMASYN’ for
                                                                           sought:                          goods in Classes 1, 3 and 5 (inter
                                                                                                            alia, cosmetics, medicines, pharm-
As grounds for her action, the applicant submits that the                                                   aceutical and sanitary prep-
setting of a limit of 20 hectares constitutes support of                                                    arations and disinfectants for the
individual undertakings, rather than support of the forests per                                             human body) — Application No
se, as required by Regulation No 1257/1999. Moreover, the                                                   662 403