CELEX: C2003/171/61
Language: en
Date: 2003-07-19 00:00:00
Title: Case T-155/03: Action brought on 24 April 2003 by Michael Cwik against the Commission of the European Communities

C 171/36              EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         19.7.2003
Action brought on 18 April 2003 by Inex N.V. against the                 Decision of the Board of      Dismissal of the applicant’s appeal
      Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market                    Appeal:
                        (Case T-153/03)                                  Pleas in law:                 Infringement of the concept of
                                                                                                       the likelihood of confusion as
                                                                                                       interpreted by the Court of Justice
                        (2003/C 171/60)                                                                in the light of:
                                                                                                       —     the identity of the goods;
                  (Language of the case: French)
                                                                                                       —     the similarity between the
                                                                                                             mark against which the
                                                                                                             opposition was directed and
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal                                               the dominant and distinctive
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before                                                   element of the first mark;
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
                                                                                                       —     the fact that the goods are
18 April 2003 by Inex N.V., represented by Thierry van Innis,
                                                                                                             targeted at the general public
lawyer.
                                                                                                             for everyday use
Robert Wiseman & Sons Limited, Glasgow (United Kingdom)
was also a party to the proceedings before the Second Board
of Appeal.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     annul the decision handed down by the Second Board of
      Appeal of the defendant on 4 February 2003 in Case R               Action brought on 24 April 2003 by Michael Cwik against
      106/2001-2;                                                              the Commission of the European Communities
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.
                                                                                                  (Case T-155/03)
                                                                                                  (2003/C 171/61)
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for Com-           Robert Wiseman & Sons Limited,                                 (Language of the case: French)
munity trade mark            Glasgow (United Kingdom)
Community trade mark         Figurative mark composed of the
sought                       graphic representation of a cow-
                             hide in black and white — appli-            An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                             cation no. 132, 134, filed for              ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                             goods and services in classes 29,           European Communities on 24 April 2003 by Michael Cwik,
                             32 and 39 (in particular: milk,             residing in Tervuren (Belgium), represented by Nicolas Lhoëst,
                             milk beverages, milk products,              lawyer.
                             dairy products, cream and yogh-
                             urt)
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
Proprietor of mark or        The plaintiff
sign cited in the oppo-
sition proceedings:                                                      —     annul the decision of the Secretary General of 13 June
                                                                               2002 confirming, without amendment, the applicant’s
Proprietor of mark or        Composite Benelux trade mark                      staff report for the period running from 1 July 1995 to
sign                         no 580 538 comprising in part a                   30 June 1997;
                             graphic representation of a cow-
                             hide in black and white registered
                                                                         —     order the defendant to pay the applicant EUR 15 000 by
                             for goods in classes 29 and 30
                                                                               way of damages;
Decision of the Oppo-        Rejection of the opposition
sition Division:                                                         —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
 ---pagebreak--- 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.