CELEX: C2002/261/32
Language: en
Date: 2002-10-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-242/02: Action brought on 14 August 2002 by Sunrider Corporation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market

C 261/16                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                    26.10.2002
Article 86(2)(f) of the Staff Regulations for officials of the             Action brought on 29 June 2002 by José Lloris Maeso
European Communities — the President of the Court of First                     against Commission of the European Communities
Instance has made an order on 14 August 2002, in which he:
                                                                                                    (Case T-165/02)
1.    Dismisses the application for interim measures;
                                                                                                    (2002/C 261/31)
2.    Orders that costs are reserved.                                                         (Language of the case: Spanish)
                                                                           An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                           ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                           European Communities on 29 June 2002 by José Lloris Maeso,
                                                                           residing in Valencia (Spain), represented by Julián Bosch
                                                                           Abarca, lawyers.
ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST                               The applicant claims that the Court should:
                             INSTANCE
                                                                           —     annul the decision of the selection board for competition
                                                                                 COM/A/10/01 (Law) of 2 May 2002, and that he be
                          of 16 July 2002                                        admitted to the next stage of that competition.
in Case T-207/02 R: Nicoletta Falcone v Commission of                      Pleas in law and main arguments
                  the European Communities
                                                                           The applicant in the present case is challenging the decision of
(Procedure for interim relief — Competition procedure —                    the selection board for COM/A/10/01 (Law), notified by letter
            Interim measures — Urgency — None)                             dated 2 May 2002, awarding him in respect of one of the
                                                                           selection tests in that competition, specifically test (a), marks
                                                                           below the minimum required to be admitted to the remainder
                         (2002/C 261/30)                                   of the tests for that competition.
                                                                           In support of his claim, the applicant alleges error in the
                   (Language of the case: Italian)                         marking of the abovementioned test (a).
In Case T-207/02 R: Nicoletta Falcone, residing in Florence
(Italy), represented by M. Condinanzi, lawyer, against Com-
mission of the European Communities (Agents: J. Currall and                Action brought on 14 August 2002 by Sunrider Corpor-
A. Dal Ferro) — application for an interim measure requiring               ation against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
the Commission to invite the applicant to complete her                                                  Market
application for admission to the second set of tests in general
competition COM/A/10/01, in the field of law, fixed for
19 July 2002, from which she was excluded by decision of the                                        (Case T-242/02)
jury of 2 May 2002 informing her that she had not been
admitted to the written tests in the said competition — the                                         (2002/C 261/32)
President of the Court of First Instance has made an order on
16 July 2002, in which he:
                                                                                               (Language of the case: Greek)
1.    Dismisses the application;
                                                                           An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                           Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
2.    Orders that costs are reserved.                                      European Communities on 14 August 2002 by Sunrider
                                                                           Corporation, whose registered office is in Torrance, California
                                                                           (USA), represented by Nikolaos Dontas and Maria Bra, Lawyers,
                                                                           with an address for service in Luxembourg.
 ---pagebreak--- 26.10.2002            EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 261/17
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              Action brought on 19 August 2002 by Antonia de Jong
                                                                                                  against Europol
—     allow the present action;
                                                                                                  (Case T-245/02)
—     annul the contested decision of the First Board of Appeal                                   (2002/C 261/33)
      of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
      (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 May 2002; and
                                                                                             (Language of the case: Dutch)
—     order the Office in any event to pay, first, the applicant’s
      costs both before the Board of Appeal and before the
                                                                         An action against Europol was brought before the Court of
      Court of First Instance, together with the fees of the             First Instance of the European Communities on 19 August
      lawyers instructed by it, and second, the translation              2002 by Antonia de Jong, residing in The Hague (Netherlands),
      costs incurred by the applicant in the procedures for              represented by Pauline de Casparis and Maria Franciscus
      examination of its application and consideration of its            Baltussen.
      appeal before the Board of Appeal.
                                                                         The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         1.    Set aside Europol’s rejection of the applicant’s complaint
                                                                               brought against the Decision of 23 November 2001 and
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                at the same time annul the contested Decision of
                                                                               23 November 2001;
Community trade mark:         the word mark ‘TOP’ — Appli-
                              cation 604 975                             2.    Principally, order Europol to grant the applicant two
                                                                               additional salary increments with effect from 1 July 2001,
                                                                               and, in the alternative, order Europol to grant the
Goods or services con-        herbal food capsule or powder;                   applicant one additional salary increment with effect
cerned:                       herbal nutritional supplement.                   from 1 July 2001;
                              (Classes 5 and 29)
                                                                         3.    Order Europol to pay to the applicant the amounts due
Decision of the exam-         refusal of the application for regis-            under (2) within 48 hours of pronouncement of the
iner:                         tration                                          judgment to be delivered in this case, plus such statutory
                                                                               interest as is due on those amounts in accordance with
                                                                               Netherlands law;
Decision of the Board of      dismissal of the appeal
Appeal:                                                                  4.    Order Europol to pay to the applicant, within 48 hours
                                                                               of pronouncement of the judgment to be delivered in this
Grounds put forward:          1.    infringement of the audi                   case, the sum of EUR 1 000 as compensation for the
                                    alteram partem rule and of the             non-material damage which she has suffered;
                                    rights of the defence
                                                                         5.    Order Europol to pay the costs incurred by the applicant
                              2.    impermissibly long pro-                    in the present proceedings.
                                    cedure before the Office’s
                                    Boards of Appeal from the
                                    lodging of the appeal to noti-
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
                                    fication of the decision to the
                                    applicant
                                                                         The applicant works for Europol. In the contested decision,
                              3.    non-notification of matters          the defendant refused to grant a salary increase to the applicant
                                    upon which the contested             on the basis of her report.
                                    decision was based
                              4.    insufficient and unclear             The applicant contends that this decision is contrary to
                                    grounds of the contested             Article 29 of the Europol Staff Regulations. According to the
                                    decision                             applicant, the Management Board has failed to lay down the
                                                                         necessary rules for the award of salary increases in accordance
                              5.    suitability for registration of      with that article. The applicant further pleads that the Director
                                    the mark                             exceeded his discretionary powers, inasmuch as the decision-
                                                                         making procedure does not satisfy the requirements of due
                              6.    distinctive character of the         care and impartiality. Lastly, the applicant pleads infringement
                                    mark                                 of the principles of equal treatment and protection of legitimate
                                                                         expectations.