CELEX: C2001/227/49
Language: en
Date: 2001-08-11 00:00:00
Title: Case T-109/01: Action brought on 18 May 2001 by Fleuren Compost N.V v Commission of the European Communities

11.8.2001              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 227/25
Action brought on 10 May 2001 by Free Trade Foods N.V.                         17 December 1997 (2) whose provisions the contested
        v Commission of the European Communities                               regulation also declares applicable.
                         (Case T-108/01)
                                                                         (1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 396/2001 providing for the
                                                                             continued application of safeguard measures for imports from the
                         (2001/C 227/48)                                     overseas countries and territories of sugar sector products with
                                                                             EC/OCT cumulation of origin for the period 1 March to 30 June
                                                                             2001, OJ L 058 of 28.2.2001, pp. 13 to 15.
                                                                         (2) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2553/97 of 17 December 1997
                    (Language of the case: Dutch)                            on rules for issuing the import licences for certain products
                                                                             covered by CN codes 1701, 1702, 1703and 1704 and qualifying
                                                                             as CP/OCT originating products, OJ 349 of 19.12.1997, pp. 26
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                             to 30.
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 10 May 2001 by Free Trade Foods
N.V., whose registered office is at Curação (Dutch Antilles),
represented by M. Slotboom and N.J. Helder, Lawyers, Rot-
terdam.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
1)    Annul Regulation No 396/2001 of 27 February 2001                   Action brought on 18 May 2001 by Fleuren Compost N.V
      [providing for the continued application of safeguard                      v Commission of the European Communities
      measures for imports from the overseas countries and
      territories of sugar sector products with EC/OCT cumu-
      lation of origin for the period 1 March to 30 June 2001];                                   (Case T-109/01)
2)    declare that the Community is liable for the damage                                         (2001/C 227/49)
      suffered by Free Trade Foods N.V. as a result of Regulation
      No 396/2001 of 27 February 2001;
3)    order the Commission to pay the costs.                                                (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                         An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                         ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         European Communities on 18 May 2001 by Fleuren Compost
                                                                         N.V., whose registered office is at Middelharnis (Netherlands),
                                                                         represented by Jules Stuyck, Lawyer, Brussels.
Free Trade Foods N.V. owns a sugar factory on Curação which
is geared to the processing of C-sugar originating in the
Community and which acquires OCT origin pursuant to                      The applicant claims that the Court should:
EC/OCT cumulation. That sugar can then be imported into the
Community free of duty.                                                  —     Annul the Commission Decision of 13 December 2000
                                                                               concerning the aid scheme which the Kingdom of the
                                                                               Netherlands has established in favour of six manure
However, pursuant to the Fourth Safeguard Measure (Com-                        processing undertakings, at least in so far as it relates to
mission Regulation No 396/2001 of 27 February 2001 (1)) a                      the applicant;
quota of 3 878 tons applies.
                                                                         —     Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceed-
                                                                               ings.
In support of its application the applicant submits the
following pleas:
—     infringement of Article 109 of the OCT Decision;                   Pleas in law and main arguments
—     infringement of the precedence established in the EC               The applicant has received, as a manure processing factory,
      Treaty in favour of OCT goods;                                     subsidies from the Netherlands authorities in the framework,
                                                                         according to the applicant, of the Bijdrageregeling Proefprojec-
—     infringement of Article 7(5) of the agreement on safe-             ten Mestverwerking (BPM) [contribution scheme for manure
      guard measures concluded in the context of the WTO,                processing pilot projects]. However, in Decision C(2000)4070
      and of Article 300(7) EC;                                          of 13 December 2000 addressed to the Netherlands authorities,
                                                                         the Commission requested recovery of the subsidy paid to the
—     unlawfulness of Commission Regulation No 2553/97 of                applicant and a number of other undertakings.
 ---pagebreak--- C 227/26              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                     11.8.2001
In support of its claim, the applicant pleads infringement of           Trade marks objected to       Verbal mark ‘Saint-Hubert 41’ —
Article 87(1) and (3)(c) of the EC Treaty. According to the             in the opposition pro-        Decision of 9 March 2001 in
applicant, the Commission, in its assessment of the aid                 cedure:                       procedure R-127/2000-1
awarded, did not take account of the specific, more expensive
production methods of the applicant required by the Nether-             Proprietor of the marks       the applicant
lands authorities whereby the smell is reduced. According to            objected to:
the applicant, this method of production is not obligatory in
the other Member States, as a result of which production is             Decision of the Oppo-         rejection of the applicant’s oppo-
cheaper. Furthermore, the applicant pleads infringement of              sition Division:              sition to the application for regis-
the Commission Decision of 6 July 1989 approving the                                                  tration of the mark ‘Hubert’
Bijdrageregeling Proefprojecten Mestverwerking and of
Article 88 of the EC Treaty. Finally, the applicant alleges             Decision of the Board of      rejection of the appeal lodged by
infringement of the duty to state reasons, the principle of             Appeal:                       the applicant
legitimate expectations and the right to a fair hearing.
                                                                        Grounds of claim:             violation of the notion of ‘likeli-
                                                                                                      hood of confusion’ referred to in
                                                                                                      Article 8(1)(b) of the Community
                                                                                                      Trade Mark Regulation (1)
                                                                        (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the
                                                                            Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
Action brought on 23 May 2001 by Védial S.A. against
   the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
                        (Case T-110/01)
                        (2001/C 227/50)
                                                                        Action brought on 23 May 2001 by Saxonia Edelmetalle
                                                                        GmbH against the Commission of the European Com-
                  (Language of the case: French)                                                    munities
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal                                   (Case T-111/01)
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 23 May 2001 by Védial S.A.,
established at Ludres (France), represented by Thierry van Innis                                 (2001/C 227/51)
and Geert Glas, avocats, with an address for service in
Luxembourg.
                                                                                          (Language of the Case: German)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     annul the decision adopted on 9 March 2001 in pro-                An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
      cedure R-127/2000-1;                                              ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                        European Communities on 23 May 2001 by Saxonia Edelme-
—     order the Office to pay all the costs.                            talle GmbH, of Halsbrücke (Germany), represented by Dr Peter
                                                                        von Woedtke, lawyer.
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                        —     annul the decision of the Commission of the European
                                                                              Communities of 28 March 2001 (Decision C(2001)
Applicant for the Com-        France Distribution                             1028) on the State aid granted by Germany in favour of
munity trade mark:                                                            EFBE Verwaltungs GmbH & Co. Management KG (now
                                                                              Lintra Beteiligungsholding GmbH, together with Zeitzer
The Community trade           the semi-figurative mark ‘Hubert’               Maschinen, Anlagen Geräte GmbH, LandTechnik Schlüter
mark concerned:               — application No 108530                         GmbH, ILKA MAFA Kältetechnik GmbH, SKL Motoren-
                                                                              und Systembautechnik GmbH, SKL Spezialapparatebau
Goods or service con-         various food products including                 GmbH, Magdeburger Eisengießerei GmbH, Saxonia Edel-
cerned:                       milk, other dairy products, vin-                metalle GmbH and Gothaer Fahrzeugwerk GmbH) —
                              egar and sauces, together with                  State aid No C41/99 (EXN 49/95) Germany.
                              hotel and catering services
                              (Classes 29, 30 and 42)                   —     order the defendant to pay the costs.