CELEX: C2003/289/48
Language: en
Date: 2003-11-29 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 September 2003 in Case T-302/02 Michael Kenny v Court of Justice of the European Communities (Officials — Appointment — Discretion of the appointing authority — Interests of the service)

C 289/22                EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                      29.11.2003
3.    Dismisses the remainder of the application.                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
4.    Orders the Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay half of                              of 17 September 2003
      the costs incurred by the applicant.
                                                                            in Case T-233/02: Charis Alexandratos and Maria Pana-
5.    Orders the applicant to bear one half of her own costs.                        giotou v Council of the European Union (1)
                                                                            (Officials — Action for annulment — Open competition —
(1) OJ 2002 C 219 of 14.09.02.                                              Decision of the selection board refusing admission to the
                                                                            oral tests — Scope of the obligation to state reasons —
                                                                            Scope of judicial review — Compliance with the rules
                                                                                  governing the deliberations of the selection board)
                                                                                                     (2003/C 289/47)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: Greek)
    JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                            In Case T-233/02, Charis Alexandratos and Maria Panagiotou,
                      of 18 September 2003                                  residing in Brussels (Belgium), represented by C. Tagaras,
                                                                            lawyer, v Council of the European Union, (Agents: F. Anton
                                                                            and D. Zahariou) — application for annulment of the decision
In Case T-221/02 Giorgio Lebedef and Others against the                     of the selection board in the Council’s open competition A/
       Commission of the European Communities (1)                           393 (2000/C98 A/02) refusing to admit the applicants to the
                                                                            oral tests for that competition, — the Court of First Instance
                                                                            (Fourth Chamber), composed of V. Tiili, President of the
(Officials — Pay — Travelling expenses — Method of                          Chamber, P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges; Registrar:
                             calculation)                                   I. Natsinas, Administrator, delivered a judgment on 17 Septem-
                                                                            ber 2003, the operative part of which is as follows:
                          (2003/C 289/46)
                                                                            1.    The action is dismissed.
                    (Language of the case: French)                          2.    Each party shall bear its own costs.
                                                                            (1) OJ 2002 C 233 of 28.9.02.
In Case T-221/02: Giorgio Lebedef, an official of the Com-
mission of the European Communities, resident in Senningen-
berg (Luxembourg), and 63 other officials, represented by
G. Bounéou and F. Frabetti, lawyers, with an address for
service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European
Communities (Agents: J. Currall and V. Joris) — application                     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
for annulment of the Commission’s decision changing, with
effect from 1996 or 1997, the procedure for calculating the                                       of 30 September 2003
annual expense of travelling to Greece in respect of the journey
via Brindisi and annulment of the applicants’ reimbursement
statements implementing that decision — the Court of First                  in Case T-302/02 Michael Kenny v Court of Justice of the
Instance (Third Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, President,                                  European Communities (1)
J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, has
given a judgment on 18 September 2003 in which it:                          (Officials — Appointment — Discretion of the appointing
                                                                                          authority — Interests of the service)
1.    Dismisses the action;
                                                                                                     (2003/C 289/48)
2.    Orders the parties to bear their own costs.                                               (Language of the case: French)
(1) OJ C 247 of 12 October 2002.
                                                                            In Case T-302/02 Michael Kenny, an official of the Court of
                                                                            Justice of the European Communities, residing at Roodt-sur-
                                                                            Syre (Luxembourg), represented by G. Vandersanden and
 ---pagebreak--- 29.11.2003             EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                              C 289/23
L. Levi, avocats, against the Court of Justice of the European              ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST
Communities (Agent: M. Schauss) — application for annul-                                                 INSTANCE
ment of the decision of the appointing authority of 11 March
2002 rejecting the applicant’s candidature for the adminis-
trator’s post referred to in notice of vacancy CJ 62/01 — the                                         of 1 August 2003
Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of V. Tiili,
President, P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges; D. Christensen,
Administrator, Registrar, has given a judgment on 30 Septem-                in Case T-198/01 R Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH
ber 2003 in which it:                                                               v Commission of the European Communities
1.    Dismisses the action;
                                                                            (Proceedings for interim measures — State aid — Obligation
2.    Orders the parties to bear their own costs.                           to recover aid — Prima facie case — Urgency — Weighing
                                                                            up of interests — Exceptional circumstances — Provisional
                                                                                                         suspension)
(1) OJ C 305 of 7 December 2002.
                                                                                                      (2003/C 289/50)
                                                                                                (Language of the case: German)
       ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                           of 3 July 2003
                                                                            In Case T-198/01 R: Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH,
in Case T-10/01: Lichtwer Pharma AG v Office for                            established at Ilmenau, (Germany), represented by G. Schohe
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and                       and C. Arhold, lawyers, with an address for service in
                       Designs) (OHIM) (1)                                  Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                            ties (Agents: V. Di Bucci and V. Kreuschitz), supported by
                                                                            Schott Glas, established at Mainz (Germany), represented by
(Community trade mark — Opposition — Opposition
                                                                            U. Soltész, lawyer — application for extension of the suspen-
              withdrawn — No need to adjudicate)
                                                                            sion of the operation, ordered in this case by order of the
                                                                            President of the Court of First Instance of 4 April 2002, of
                          (2003/C 289/49)                                   Article 2 of Commission Decision 2002/185/EC of 12 June
                                                                            2001 on State aid implemented by Germany for Technische
                   (Language of the case: German)                           Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH (OJ 2000 L 62, p. 30) — the
                                                                            President of the Court of First Instance has made an order on
                                                                            1 August 2003 in which he:
In Case T-10/01, Lichtwer Pharma AG, established in Berlin,
represented by H.P. Kunz-Hallstein and R. Kunz-Hallstein,                   1.    Suspends the operation until 17 February 2004 of Article 2 of
lawyers, v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market                        Commission Decision 2002/185/EC of 12 June 2001 on
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: O. Walbroeck and                        State aid C 44/2001 implemented by Germany for Technische
G. Schneider), Biofarma, formerly Orsem SARL, established in                      Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH;
Neuilly-sur-Seine (France), represented by V. Gil Vega and
A. Ruiz López, lawyers: Appeal against the decision of the
Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in                   2.    Makes that suspension subject to the following conditions: first,
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 November                       that the four conditions laid down in the second point of the
2000 (Case R 586/1999-2) relating to opposition proceedings                       operative part of the order made today in Case T-378/02 R
between Lichtwer Pharma AG and Biofarma, the Court of First                       should be satisfied by the applicant, especially as regards the
Instance (Second Chamber), composed of: N.J. Forwood,                             dates fixed therein; second, that the applicant should before
President, J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar,                31 December 2003 at the latest repay to the Bundesanstalt für
has made an order on 3 July 2003, the operative part of which                     Vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben an additional sum of
is as follows:                                                                    EUR 256 000 and that it should lodge at the Registry of the
                                                                                  Court of First Instance and at the Commission, within one week
1.    There is no need to adjudicate.                                             of making that payment, and by 7 January 2004 at the latest,
                                                                                  written proof of that payment; third, that it should lodge at the
2.    The applicant and the intervener must be ordered to bear their              Registry of the Court of First Instance and at the Commission,
      own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the defendant.                   by 6 February 2004 at the latest, a detailed report drawn up
                                                                                  by an accountant on its financial situation at 31 December
                                                                                  2003 and, in particular, the additional sum which it would be
(1) OJ C 161 of 2.6.2001.                                                         able to pay by 30 June 2004 at the latest, if judgment in the
                                                                                  case in the main proceedings should not have been given by
                                                                                  that lastmentioned date.