CELEX: C2000/063/61
Language: en
Date: 2000-03-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-356/99: Action brought on 15 December 1999 by Sonia Marion Elder and Robert Dale Elder against the Commission of the European Communities

C 63/30               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                       4.3.2000
— hold that the denomination ‘Trustedlink’ is in conformity              represented by Jean-Noël Louis, Greta-Françoise Parmentier
    with Article 7 of Regulation No 40/94 for the above                  and Véronique Peere, of the Brussels Bar, with an address for
    reasons;                                                             service in Luxembourg at the offices of Société de Gestion
                                                                         Fiduciaire, 2-4 Rue Beck.
— condemn the OHIM to pay all expenses.
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         — annul the decision rejecting the application by the appli-
Pleas in law and main arguments                                              cant for the post of Head of the unit responsible for
                                                                             ‘Resources, internal control and relations with the Court of
                                                                             Auditors’ within the former Directorate-General XXIII;
Trade mark concerned:         ‘Trustedlink’
                                                                         — annul the appointment of another candidate to that post;
Product or service:           Computer software for electronic
                              commerce, business consulting
                                                                         — order the defendant to pay the costs.
                              services for integrating commerce
                              technologies and services, softwa-
                              re integration services for integrat-
                              ing corporate application systems          Pleas in law and main arguments
                              with electronic commerce tech-
                              nologies and services, education           The applicant maintains that, by adopting the contested
                              services for electronic commerce           decisions, the defendant has breached the legal framework
                              technologies and services, as well         which it imposed on itself in drawing up the notice of vacancy,
                              as services for assisting organis-         and has infringed the principle of equal treatment and the
                              ations in deploying, expanding             principle that officials should have reasonable career prospects.
                              or managing electronic commerce            He further maintains that the defendant has disregarded
                              technologies and services (classes         Article 25 of the Staff Regulations of officials, inasmuch as it
                              9, 35, 38, 41 and 42)                      has failed to provide him with any information enabling him
                                                                         to examine the validity of the contested decisions.
Decision        contested     decision of the examiner not to
before the Board of           consider the trade mark eligible
Appeal:                       for registration, pursuant to
                              Article 7(1)(b) of the Community
                              Trade Mark Regulation (CTMR)
Pleas in law relied on:       missapplication of Article 7(1)(b)
                              of the CTMR                                Action brought on 15 December 1999 by Sonia Marion
                                                                         Elder and Robert Dale Elder against the Commission of
Subsidiary:                   lack of grounds                                             the European Communities
                                                                                                   (Case C-356/99)
                                                                                                    (2000/C 63/61)
                                                                                            (Language of the case: English)
Action brought on 9 December 1999 by Christian Brum-
ter against the Commission of the European Communities                   An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                         ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                         European Communities on 15 December 1999 by Sonia
                        (Case T-351/99)                                  Marion Elder and Robert Dale Elder, represented by Scott
                                                                         Crosby, with an address for service at the Chambers of
                                                                         Kemmler Rapp Böhlke & Crosby, 9 Rond-Point Schuman,
                         (2000/C 63/60)
                                                                         1040 Brussels.
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
                   (Language of the case: French)
                                                                         — annul the refusal of the defendant constituting a failure to
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                    give a substantive reply to the confirmatory application of
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                   the applicants of 25 October 1999;
European Communities on 9 December 1999 by Christian
Brumter, residing in Pristina (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia),          — order the defendant to pay the applicants’ costs.
 ---pagebreak--- 4.3.2000               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 63/31
Pleas in law and main arguments                                          The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         — Declare Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2799/1999 of
The applicants have already made two applications to the                     17 December 1999 laying down details of rules for
Commission for review of its refusal to grant access to certain              applying Regulation (EEC) No 1255/1999 as regards the
minutes of the Advisory Committee on VAT established by                      grant of aid for skimmed milk and skimmed-milk powder
Article 29 of the Sixth VAT Directive (1). In the course of the              intended for animal feed and the sale of such skimmed-milk
administrative proceedings the applicants lodged another                     powder to be null and void;
application for review with the Secretary General of the
Commission.                                                              — Order the defendant to reimburse the applicant’s costs.
In the present case they now submit that, by failing to give a           Pleas in law and main argument
substantive reply within one month to that application, the
Commission was deemed to have refused the application by                 The implementing regulation of the Commission under chal-
virtue of Article 2(4) of Commission Decision 94/90/ECSC/E-              lenge cancelled grants for skimmed milk for use as liquid
C/Euratom (Access decision). That refusal was unlawful per se            feedingstuff. The plaintiffs have calf rearing concerns, which
because it infringed Article 2(2) of the Access Decision and, in         have hitherto been using liquid feedingstuff, and dairies have
addition, Article 253 EC because, although a decision, it wholly         been were delivering milk to those concerns. The plaintiffs
fails to give reasons.                                                   consider themselves to be actually and individually concerned
                                                                         by the Regulation.
(1) Case T-78/99 Elder & Elder v Kommission, OJ C 174 of                 The plaintiffs essentially advance the following arguments:
    19.6.1999, p. 11, and Case T-178/99 Elder & Elder v Kommission,
    OJ C 281 of 1.10.1999, p. 28.                                        — Lack of jurisdiction on the part of the
                                                                             Commission
                                                                             In cancelling the grants, the Commission acted ultra vires
                                                                             its jurisdiction to issue implementing measures.
                                                                         — Infringement of an essential procedural
                                                                             requirement
Action brought on 5 January 2000 by Gustav Hölzl,                            The legal measure under challenge does not contain an
Günter Wiegert, Molkerei Wagenfeld Karl Niemann                              adequate statement of reasons.
GmbH & Co. KG, Josef Brüninghoff and Ludger Nienhaus
                                                                         — Infringement of the Treaty and general
  against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                             principles of law
                         (Case T-1/2000)                                     There is no objective justification for drawing a distinction
                                                                             between skimmed milk and skimmed-milk powder, in
                                                                             respect of which grants may still be made, and the
                          (2000/C 63/62)                                     distinction therefore infringes general principles of law.
                                                                             The regulation under challenge jeopardises the existence
                                                                             of the plaintiffs’ concerns since they are not in a position
                   (Language of the case: German)                            to change to skimmed-milk powder for animal feed. It
                                                                             therefore affects their rights in immoveable property.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                    Placing a disproportionate amount of the burden on one
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                   particular group of economic operators constitutes an
European Communities on 5 January 2000 by Gustav Hölzl                       infringement of the principles of proportionality and
of Damme, Germany, and four others, represented by Ulrich                    the protection of legitimate expectations and of the
Schrömbges and Lothar Harings, Sozietät Graf von Westphalen                  Commission’s duty of care. Finally, the implementing
Fritze und Modest, Hamburg, Germany, with an address for                     regulation infringes basic Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999,
service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Arendt and                          since the Commission did not have power to issue the
Madernach, 8-10 Rue Mathias Hardt, L-2010 Luxembourg.                        implementing provisions in question.