CELEX: C2003/213/63
Language: en
Date: 2003-09-06 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 July 2003 in Case T-65/02: Michelle Chetaud v European Parliament (Officials — Pension — Weighting applicable — Proof of residence — Suspension of measure — Effect on the burden of proof)

C 213/32                EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         6.9.2003
     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                                    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                                                     of 9 July 2003
                           of 9 July 2003                                  in Case T-234/01, Andreas Stihl AG & Co. KG v Office
                                                                           for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
                                                                                               and Designs) (OHIM) (1)
in Case T-162/01: Laboratorios RTB, SL v Office for
                                                                           (Community trade mark — Colours — Combination of
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
                                                                           orange and grey — Absolute ground for refusal — Distinc-
                        Designs) (OHIM) ( 1)
                                                                           tive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/
                                                                                                           94)
(Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Earlier                                              (2003/C 213/62)
figurative and word marks containing the word GIORGI —
Application for Community word mark GIORGIO BEVER-                                           (Language of the case: German)
LY HILLS — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b)
                  of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
                                                                           In Case T-234/01, Andreas Stihl AG & Co. KG, established in
                                                                           Waiblingen (Germany), represented by S. Völker and A. Klett,
                                                                           lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against
                          (2003/C 213/61)                                  the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
                                                                           Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agent: G. Schneider) — appli-
                                                                           cation for annulment of the decision of the First Board of
                                                                           Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
                   (Language of the case: Spanish)                         (Trade Marks and Designs) of 24 July 2001 (Case R 477/2000-
                                                                           1), refusing registration of a combination of the colours orange
                                                                           and grey as a Community trade mark, the Court of First
                                                                           Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of V. Tiili, President,
                                                                           P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges; Registrar: B. Pastor,
                                                                           Assistant Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 July 2003 in
                                                                           which it:
In Case T-162/01, Laboratorios RTB, SL, established in Bigues
i Riells (Spain), represented by A. Canela Giménez, lawyer, v              (1) Dismisses the action.
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: O. Montalto and J.F. Crespo                   (2) Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
Carrillo), the other party to the proceedings before the Board
of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being: Giorgio Beverly Hills,             (1 ) OJ 2001 C 348.
Inc., established in Santa Monica, California (United States of
America): Action brought against the decision of the First
Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 April 2001
(Case R 122/2000-1), the Court of First Instance (Fourth
Chamber), composed of: V. Tiili, President, P. Mengozzi and                     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
M. Vilaras, Judges; B. Pastor, Deputy Registrar has given a
judgment on 9 July 2003, in which it:                                                                of 8 July 2003
                                                                           in Case T-65/02: Michelle Chetaud v European Parlia-
                                                                                                         ment ( 1)
1.     Dismisses the application;
                                                                           (Officials — Pension — Weighting applicable — Proof of
                                                                           residence — Suspension of measure — Effect on the burden
2.     Orders the applicant to pay the costs.                                                           of proof)
                                                                                                    (2003/C 213/63)
( 1) OJ C 303 of 27.10.2001.                                                                  (Language of the case: French)
                                                                           In Case T-65/02: Michelle Chetaud, former official of the
                                                                           European Parliament, residing in Nice (France), represented by
 ---pagebreak--- 6.9.2003                EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                         C 213/33
L. Mosar, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg,               1.     dismissed the application;
against European Parliament (Agents: J. de Wachter and
G. Knudsen) — application for annulment, first, of the decision
of the Parliament of 27 June 2001 refusing to consider that                2.     ordered each party to bear its own costs.
the applicant’s place of residence is in Nice and apply the
weighting for France to her retirement pension from 1 January
2000 and, second, of the decision of the Parliament of                     (1 ) OJ No C 144 of 15.6.2002.
6 December 2001 expressly rejecting the applicant’s complaint
— the Court of First Instance (single judge: A.W.H. Meij);
I. Natsinas, Registrar, has given a judgment on 8 July 2003 in
which it:
1.     Annuls the decision of the Parliament of 27 June 2001 in so
       far as it applies to the applicant’s pension the weighting
       applicable to Luxembourg for the whole of the year 2000.
                                                                                JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
2.     Orders the Parliament to pay all the costs.
                                                                                                      of 3 April 2003
( 1) OJ C 109, 4.5.2002.
                                                                           in Case T-119/02: Royal Philips Electronics NV v Com-
                                                                                      mission of the European Communities (1)
                                                                           (Competition — Concentrations — Admissibility — Com-
                                                                           mitments in the course of the first phase of examination —
                                                                           Serious doubts as to compatibility with the common market
                                                                                       — Partial referral to national authorities)
     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                                                      (2003/C 213/65)
                         of 19 June 2003
                                                                                               (Language of the case: English)
in Case T-78/02: Stephan-Harald Voigt v European Central
                               Bank (1)
(Officials — Employee of the European Central Bank —                       In Case T-119/02, Royal Philips Electronics NV, established at
                        Written reprimand)                                 Eindhoven (Netherlands), represented by E.H. Pijnacker Hordijk
                                                                           and N.G. Cronstedt, lawyers, supported by De –Longhi SpA,
                                                                           established in Treviso (Italy), represented by M. Merola,
                         (2003/C 213/64)                                   I. van Schendel, G. Crichlow and D.P. Domenicucci, lawyers, v
                                                                           Commission of the European Communities (Agents: V. Superti,
                                                                           K. Wiedner and J.E. Flynn), supported by SEB SA, established in
                    (Language of the case: German)                         Écully (France), represented by D. Voillemot and S. Hautbourg,
                                                                           lawyers, and by French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues
                                                                           and F. Million): Application for annulment of, first, the
                                                                           Commission’s decision SG(2002) D/228078 of 8 January
                                                                           2002, based on Article 6(1)(b) and Article 6(2) of Regulation
In Case T-78/02: Stephan-Harald Voigt, member of staff of                  No 4064/89 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European
the European Central Bank, residing in Frankfurt am Main                   Economic Area, not to oppose the concentration between SEB
(Germany), represented by N. Pflüger, lawyer, against the                  and Moulinex and to declare it compatible with the common
European Central Bank (Agents: V. Saintot and T. Gilliams,                 market and with the Agreement on the European Economic
assisted by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer) — application for annul-                 Area, subject to compliance with the proposed commitments
ment of the decision of 1 March 2002, taken by Mr Noyer,                   (Case COMP/M.2621 — SEB/Moulinex) and, second, the
Vice President of the European Central Bank, to issue a written            Commission’s decision C(2002)38, of 8 January 2002, adopted
reprimand to the applicant — the Court of First Instance                   on the basis of Article 9(2)(a) of Regulation No 4064/89,
(Third Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi              referring part of the examination of that concentration to the
and M. Jaeger, Judges; B. Pastor, Deputy Registrar, gave a                 French authorities, the Court of First Instance(Third Chamber),
judgment on 19 June 2003, in which it:                                     composed of: K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi and M. Jaeger,