CELEX: C2001/303/34
Language: en
Date: 2001-10-27 00:00:00
Title: Case T-189/01: Action brought on 5 August 2001 by Vassilios Tsarnavas against the Commission of the European Communities

C 303/20               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                   27.10.2001
a company duly organized and incorporated under the laws of              The Commission’s argument that the applicant’s copyright is a
the State of Delaware (USA), represented by Nicholas Levy,               prerequisite for entering the market is, according to the
John Temple Lang and Robert O’Donoghue, of Cleary, Gottlieb,             applicant, also incorrect and based on a misinterpretation of
Steen & Hamilton, Brussels (Belgium).                                    the facts. The applicant states that its competitors are using a
                                                                         different structure to present the information and that new-
                                                                         comers in the market are free to develop their own structure.
                                                                         The applicant claims that its ‘1 860 brick structure’ is not the
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              de facto industry standard, but merely the format used by the
                                                                         leading data services provider.
—     annul the decision of the Commission of 3 July 2001,
      ordering interim measures in case COMP D3/38044,
                                                                         The applicant further claims that there is no prima facie case to
                                                                         justify the ordering of an interim measure. Also, the Com-
alternatively                                                            mission has erred in weighing the interests involved for the
                                                                         purposes of ordering the interim measures. According to the
                                                                         applicant, the grant of a licence would cause irreparable
—     annul the decision insofar as it requires IMS Health to            damage to its business and render its intellectual property
      license the 1 860 Brick Structure to companies currently           rights devoid of all purpose.
      present on the German market for regional sales data
      services and specifies the conditions under which the
      negotiation of licence terms is to be conducted and                The applicant further claims that the Commission has violated
      approved by the Commission,                                        the applicant’s rights of defence during the preliminary
                                                                         procedure.
and, in any event,
—     order the Commission to pay IMS Health’s legal costs and
      expenses in relation to this matter;
—     adopt all such further measures as the Court may consider
      appropriate.                                                       Action brought on 5 August 2001 by Vassilios Tsarnavas
                                                                           against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                                                  (Case T-189/01)
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                                                 (2001/C 303/34)
The applicant provides regional sales data in Germany to                                    (Language of the case: French)
pharmaceutical companies. It has developed in that connection
a specific presentation of this information, called the
‘1 860 brick structure’, of which the applicant holds the                An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
intellectual property rights in Germany.                                 ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                         European Communities on 5 August 2001 by Vassilios
                                                                         Tsarnavas, resident in Brussels, represented by Nicolas Lhoëst,
                                                                         lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg.
The Commission has ordered an interim measure relating to a
proceeding against the applicant under Article 82 of the EC
Treaty, requiring the applicant to grant licences for the use of         The applicant claims that the Court should:
the ‘1 860 brick structure’ to third parties currently present on
the German market for the provision of regional sales data.              —     annul the decision adopted by the Commission on
That measure is currently contested by the applicant.                          22 September 2000 in that it decides that the applicant’s
                                                                               name should not be included on the list of grade A 5
                                                                               officials considered the most deserving of promotion
In support of its application, the applicant claims that the                   under the 1999 promotion procedure and, as a result,
Commission has violated the protection granted by national                     that the applicant should not be promoted to grade A 4
and international law to its intellectual property rights. The                 under the 1999 promotions procedure;
right to refuse access to one’s intellectual property constitutes,
according to the applicant, the essence of intellectual property         —     in so far as necessary, annul the Commission’s implied
rights. Such a refusal is not therefore contrary to Article 82                 decision rejecting the complaint submitted by the appli-
EC, unless it is accompanied by additional conduct. Such                       cant on 27 December 2000 under Article 90(2) of the
conduct is, according to the applicant, not present in this case.              Staff Regulations;
 ---pagebreak--- 27.10.2001              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 303/21
—     consequently annul the 1999 A 4 promotions procedure                     —     Managium, relating to the Biogaz, Solaire Bioclima-
      with regard to the applicant;                                                  tique and Biogaz contracts is unlawful, since those
                                                                                     invoices cover the services actually provided by the
—     order the defendant to pay all the costs of the action.                        applicant’s Managing Director in accordance with
                                                                                     the work programme;
                                                                               and consequently declare that the fees charged by Deira
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                and Managium must be accepted;
In support of his action, the applicant puts forward the same            —     declare that the decision terminating the Photovoltaic
pleas in law as in Case T-188/01. In addition the applicant                    SME/1883/98-EU contract is unlawful;
alleges non-compliance with the promotions procedure.
                                                                               and consequently declare that the Commission has no
                                                                               legal right to claim repayment of the advance of
                                                                               36 000 Euros paid by way of financial contribution;
                                                                         —     declare that the Commission’s decision retroactively
                                                                               terminating the Transport DIS/1178/1997-BE Agreement
Action brought on 14 August 2001 by the Groupement                             is unlawful;
européen d’intérêt économique Lior against the Com-
            mission of the European Communities                                and consequently declare that the Commission has no
                                                                               legal right to claim repayment of the initial advance of
                          (Case T-192/01)                                      36 000 Euros paid by way of financial contribution, and
                                                                               that the contract should run its term;
                          (2001/C 303/35)
                                                                         As regards the Altener                      Agores       XVII/
                                                                         41030/Z/99-085 contract
                   (Language of the case: French)
                                                                         —     order the Commission to pay the sum of 68 070 Euros,
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                      representing the final instalment of its financial contri-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                     bution, together with interest at the statutory rate from
European Communities on 14 August 2001 by the Groupe-                          the date of the letter of 23 July 2001 giving formal notice
ment européen d’intérêt économique Lior, established in                        to pay;
Brussels, represented by Véronique Marien and Joëlle Chou-
croun, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.               As regards the Thermie and Altener con-
                                                                         tracts
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                         —     order the Commission to compensate the applicant for
In the context of performance of Thermie                                       the damage suffered in the context of the performance of
contracts                                                                      all of the Thermie and Altener contracts, initially esti-
                                                                               mated, on a fair and equitable basis, to amount to the
—     order the European Commission to pay the final instal-                   sum of 1 million Euros, subject to increase or decrease in
      ment of its financial contribution, namely:                              the course of proceedings;
      —     for the Biomasse           SME/1539/97        contract:      —     order the Commission to pay all the costs.
            40 500 Euros
      —     for the Windenergy           SME/792/96       contract:
            36 000 Euros,
                                                                         Pleas in law and main arguments
      together with interest at the statutory rate from the date
      of the letter of 6 July 2001 giving formal notice to pay
      until payment in full;                                             The applicant in the present case, a European economic
                                                                         interest grouping with 10 members representing 4 countries
—     declare that the Commission’s decision rejecting the               of the European Union, concluded several contracts with the
      invoices of its members                                            Commission under the Thermie Programme, Section B, with
                                                                         the aim of creating CD-ROMs concerning:
      —     Deira, relating to all of the Thermie contracts, is
            unlawful, in that it is based on a non-contractual           —     the management of biogas obtained from waste and
            audit of its accounts;                                             waste-water treatment (Biogaz SME/003/95-BE contract);