CELEX: C2003/171/63
Language: en
Date: 2003-07-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-161/03: Action brought on 5 May 2003 by Cascades SA against the Commission of the European Communities

19.7.2003              EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                            C 171/37
Pleas in law and main arguments                                           the temporary staff. By decision of 14 July 2002, the Selection
                                                                          Board did not enter the applicant’s name on the reserve list.
                                                                          That decision was annulled by the Court of First Instance in
The applicant in these proceedings objects to the two-year                Case T-102/01 Pérez-Díaz v Commission [2002] ECR II-0000.
delay in receiving his staff report in respect of the period              In order to comply with that judgment, the Selection Board
between July 1995 and June 1997 and to the contents thereof,              decided to organise fresh oral tests in which the applicant took
by comparison to the preceding reports.                                   part while nevertheless reserving his position as to its validity.
                                                                          The selection board decided that the applicant’s results in the
                                                                          new tests were not sufficient to enable him to be entered on
In support of his claims, the applicant alleges failure to fulfil         the reserve list.
the obligation to provide a statement of reasons, manifest error
of assessment, misuse of powers and irregular procedures.
                                                                          In support of his application, the applicant puts forward five
                                                                          pleas in law alleging:
                                                                          —     infringement of the second paragraph of Article 25 of the
                                                                                Staff Regulations inasmuch as the contested decision was
                                                                                inadequately reasoned;
Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Orlando Pérez-Díaz                     —     infringement of Article 233 of the EC Treaty and of the
    against Commission of the European Communities                              principles of equal treatment and objectivity in making a
                                                                                choice from among the candidates inasmuch as the
                         (Case T-156/03)                                        applicant’s performance was allegedly assessed under
                                                                                conditions and according to criteria which were different
                                                                                to those employed in respect of the other candidates;
                         (2003/C 171/62)
                                                                          —     breach of the principles of ‘restitutio in integrum’ and of
                   (Language of the case: French)                               equal treatment inasmuch as the applicant was required
                                                                                to re-sit the first and third stages of the oral test and give
                                                                                his views, in the second part of the second stage, on
                                                                                current scientific developments which had taken place
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                       since the original tests;
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 30 April 2003 by Orlando Pérez-                   —     infringement of Article 233 of the EEC Treaty, inasmuch
Díaz, residing in Brussels, represented by Marc-Albert Lucas,                   as the members of the new Selection Board had insuf-
lawyer.                                                                         ficient knowledge of the Spanish language to be able to
                                                                                assess the candidate’s abilities;
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               —     breach of the principle of ‘restitutio in integrum’ inas-
                                                                                much as the composition of the new selection board was
—     annul the decision of the Selection Board in COM/R/A/1/                   not as close as possible to that of the original board.
      1999 not to enter his name in the reserve list for that
      selection, notified to him by letter of 21 January 2003
      from the Head of Personnel in the Research Directorate
      General of the Commission in the name of the Chairman
      of the Selection Board;
—     order the Commission to pay him, by way of compen-                  Action brought on 5 May 2003 by Cascades SA against
      sation for the non-material damage and damage to his                       the Commission of the European Communities
      career suffered by him as a result of the unlawfulness of
      the contested decision damages at a level to be assessed
                                                                                                     (Case T-161/03)
      by the Court of First Instance;
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                                                         (2003/C 171/63)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: French)
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
The applicant, an agent for the Centre for the Development of             ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Enterprise, applied to take part in selection procedure COM/R/            European Communities on 5 May 2003 by Cascades SA,
A/01/1999 organised by the defendant with a view to                       established in La Rochette (France), represented by Jacques
establishing a reserve list for the recruitment of members of             Buhart and Pierre-M. Louis, lawyers.
 ---pagebreak--- C 171/38               EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                           19.7.2003
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                The applicant claims that the Court should:
—      order the Commission to make good the damage suffered               —     annul the decision of the Commission of 6 May 2002
       by it as a result of incomplete compliance with the                       definitively recruiting the applicant in Grade A 7 at step 3;
       judgment of the Court of 28 February 2002;
                                                                           —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
—      order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                           Pleas in law and main arguments
Pleas in law and main arguments                                            The applicant took up his duties as a probationary official on
                                                                           1 August 2001 and was provisionally recruited at step 1 in
                                                                           grade A 7. The applicant made a request for recruitment at a
                                                                           higher grade. That request was refused.
The applicant has brought this action seeking a declaration
that the Commission is liable for failing to comply entirely
with the judgment of the Court ( 1) reducing the amount of the             In support of his application the applicant submits that there
fine imposed on the applicant by the Commission in decision                was a breach of Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations in so far
94/601/CE (Plasterboard), relating to a proceeding pursuant to             as the Commission did not take account of the specific
Article 85 of the EC Treaty (IV/C/33.833-Plasterboard) ( 2).               requirements of the service. The applicant also submits that
                                                                           there was a manifest error of assessment.
In the applicant’s view, the Commission should still pay the
interests due on the difference between the sum paid and the
amount of the fine finally fixed by the Court of First Instance
together with the costs, agreed by common accord of the
parties at EUR 50 000. The defendant incurs non-contractual
liability for the damage arising therefrom.                                Action brought on 12 May 2003 by Sergio Rossi S.p.A.
                                                                           against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                                    Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
( 1) Case T-308/94 Cascades SA v Commission [2002] ECR II-0000.
( 2) OJ 1991 L 243, p. 1.
                                                                                                     (Case T-169/03)
                                                                                                     (2003/C 171/65)
                                                                                               (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                           An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Pascal Millot against                   Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
        the Commission of the European Communities                         the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
                                                                           12 May 2003 by Sergio Rossi S.p.A., represented by Alessandro
                                                                           Ruo, lawyer.
                          (Case T-162/03)
                                                                           Sissi Rossi s.r.l. was also a party to the proceedings before the
                          (2003/C 171/64)                                  Board of Appeal.
                    (Language of the case: French)                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                           —     declare that there is a likelihood of confusion between
                                                                                 the trade marks in question with regard to all the goods
                                                                                 referred to and annul the contested decision at issue; in
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                        the alternative, declare that the trade marks are inconsist-
ties was brought before the Court of Justice of the European                     ent with each other so far as concerns ‘ladies’ bags’ and
Communities on 30 April 2003 by Pascal Millot, residing in                       ‘ladies’ shoes’ and declare that there is an affinity between
Brussels, represented by Sébastien Orlandi, Albert Coolen,                       such goods;
Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal, lawyers, with an address
for service in Luxembourg.                                                 —     order the defendant to pay the costs.