CELEX: C2003/239/36
Language: en
Date: 2003-10-04 00:00:00
Title: Case T-248/03: Action brought on 30 June 2003 by Société des Produits Nestlé S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

C 239/18                  EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                         4.10.2003
Pleas in law and main arguments                                               Action brought on 30 June 2003 by Société des Produits
                                                                              Nestlé S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the
                                                                                                       Internal Market
The applicant invokes the same pleas in law as in Case T-218/
03 (1).
                                                                                                       (Case T-248/03)
( 1) See p. 9 of this Official Journal.
                                                                                                       (2003/C 239/36)
                                                                              (Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
                                                                              of the Rules of Procedure — language in which the application was
                                                                                                       submitted: English)
Action brought on 13 June 2003 by Cecil Sharkey against
        the Commission of the European Communities                            An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                              Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
                                                                              the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
                             (Case T-240/03)
                                                                              30 June 2003 by Société des Produits Nestlé S.A., Vevey,
                                                                              Switzerland, represented by Mr J. Evrard, lawyer.
                            (2003/C 239/35)
                                                                              Grupo Kalise Menorquina, S.A. was also a party to the
                      (Language of the case: English)                         proceedings before the Board of Appeal.
                                                                              The applicant claims that the Court should:
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                              —     annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of
European Communities on 13 June 2003 by Cecil Sharkey,
                                                                                    28 April 2003;
Clogherhead, (Ireland), represented by P. Gallagher and A.
Collins, Barristers, and D. Barry, Solicitor.
                                                                              —     order for payment of all costs of the proceedings against
                                                                                    the OHIM.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—      annul the decision contained in Article 2 of Commission
       Decision of 4 April 2003 on the requests received by the               Pleas in law and main arguments
       Commission to increase in MAGP IV objectives to take
       into account improvements on safety, navigation at sea,
       hygiene, product quality and working conditions for                    Applicant for the Com-         Société des Produits Nestlé S.A.
       vessels of more than 12 m in length overall notified                   munity trade mark:
       under document number C(2003) 1113 to reject a safety
       capacity application in respect of the MFV Endurance;                  Community trade mark           The figurative mark ‘POLO POLO’
                                                                              sought:                        (application No 803429) for
—      order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceed-                                               goods in class 30 (a.o. cocoa and
       ings.                                                                                                 preparations having a base of
                                                                                                             cocoa, chocolate products, con-
                                                                                                             fectionery, sweets, sugar, chewing
                                                                                                             gum).
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                              Proprietor of mark or          Grupo Kalise Menorquina S.A.
                                                                              sign cited in the oppo-
                                                                              sition proceedings:
The applicant invokes the same pleas in law as in Case T-218/
03 (1).
                                                                              Mark or sign cited in          The Spanish national word mark
                                                                              opposition:                    ‘POLOS’ for goods in the old
( 1) See p. 9 of this Official Journal.                                                                      Spanish class 7 (a.o. ice creams,
                                                                                                             cocoas, chocolate products, cara-
                                                                                                             mels, general confectionery prod-
                                                                                                             ucts).
 ---pagebreak--- 4.10.2003             EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                        C 239/19
Decision of the Oppo-         Partial admission of the oppo-              Pleas in law and main arguments
sition Division:              sition and allowance to proceed
                              to registration of the Community
                              trade mark for the following                The purpose of the present action is to challenge the legality
                              goods: cocoa, sugar and chewing             of the implied decision rejecting the complaint by the applicant
                              gum.                                        against her suspension from her duties following her removal
                                                                          from the post of Accounting Officer and Budget Execution
                                                                          Director in Directorate General Budget, and her transfer to the
Decision of the Board of      Dismissal of the appeal lodged by
Appeal:                       Société des Produits Nestlé.                position of Principal Adviser in Directorate General Personnel
                                                                          and Administration, as the result of a disciplinary procedure.
Pleas in law:                 According to the applicant there
                              is no likelihood of confusion               This application is based on the following elements:
                              between the two marks and it
                              refers in this respect to a judgment        —     Breach of Article 25 of the Staff Regulation, through
                              of the Superior Court of justice in               the adoption of a measure resulting in the applicant’s
                              Madrid that allegedly stated that                 suspension without adequate grounds therefore, in the
                              Menorquina was not entitled to                    absence of any breach of Articles 12, 21 or 60 of the
                              oppose the use of the word mark                   Staff Regulation.
                              ‘POLO’ in Spain.
                                                                          —     Breach of Article 88 of the Staff Regulation, in the
                                                                                absence of any serious misconduct that may justify the
                                                                                urgent need to exclude her from the working place.
                                                                          —     Breach of the principle of proportionality, in as much as
                                                                                the measure in question is to be qualified as dispro-
                                                                                portionnal in relation to the allegations made against her.
                                                                          —     Breach of the rights of defence, through the adoption of
Action brought on 27 June 2003 by Marta Andreasen                               a suspension measure without ensuring the possibility of
  against the Commission of the European Communities                            the applicant being heard and protecting her rights.
                       (Case T-250/03)
                       (2003/C 239/37)
                                                                          Action brought on 2 July 2003 by Albert Albrecht GmbH
                  (Language of the case: English)                         + Co.KG & 9 others against the Commission of the
                                                                                              European Communities
                                                                                                  (Case T-251/03)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                                        (2003/C 239/38)
European Communities on 27 June 2003 by Marta Andreasen,
Brussels, Belgium, represented by I. Forrester, QC.                                         (Language of the case: English)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                          ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
—     annul the implied decision of the Commission rejecting              European Communities on 2 July 2003 by Albert Albrecht
      the Applicant’s appeal against her suspension from her              GmbH + Co.KG, Aulendorf, Germany, AniMedica GmbH,
      duties;                                                             Senden-Bösensell, Germany, Ceva Tiergesundheit GmbH, Düs-
                                                                          seldorf, Germany, Fatro S.p.A., Bologna, Italy, Laboratorios
—     award her pecuniary damages for an amount of money                  Syva S.A., León, Spain, Laboratorios Virbac S.A., Barcelona,
      to be fixed by the Court, plus interest at 5 % or at such           Spain, Química Farmacéutica Bayer S.A., Barcelona, Spain,
      other rate as may be fixed by the Court;                            Univete Técnica Pecuaria Comercio Industria, Lda, Lisboa,
                                                                          Portugal, Vétoquinol Especialidades Veterinarias S.A., Madrid,
                                                                          Spain, Virbac S.A., Carros, France, represented by D. Wael-
—     award her the costs of the present action.                          broeck, U. Zinsmeister and N. Rampal, lawyers.