CELEX: C2000/163/58
Language: en
Date: 2000-06-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-83/00: Action brought on 6 April 2000 by Hänseler GmbH and Schuck GmbH against the Commission of the European Communities

10.6.2000             EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 163/29
The applicants claim that the Court of First Instance should:           Pleas in law and main arguments
— Annul part nine of Annex ID to Council Regulation (EC)
    No 2742/1999 of 17 December 1999 fixing for 2000 the                The trade mark con-           verbal mark ‘LITE’ — application
    fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain         cerned:                       No 214932
    fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in
    Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters              Goods or service con-         Goods and services in Classes 5,
    where limitations in catch are required and amending                cerned:                       29, 30, 32 and 33 (essentially
    Regulation (EC) No 66/98;                                                                         foodstuffs and beverages)
— Annul point 1, 1.1, second subparagraph, indent (i), of               Decision contested be-        Refusal of registration by the
    Annex IV to Council Regulation (EC) No 685/95 of                    fore the Board of Ap-         examiner
    27 March 1995 on the management of the fishing effort               peal:
    relating to certain Community fishing areas and resources,
    on the basis of the reasons stated, in so far as the Council        Grounds of claim:             — Denial by the Board of Appeal
    approved, for the year 2000, an analytical TAC for Zone                                               of the right to a fair hearing
    VIII and a common TAC is not possible; and                                                        — Misapplication of Article
                                                                                                          7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No
— Order the Commission to pay the costs.                                                                  40/94
                                                                                                      — Misapplication of Article
                                                                                                          7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                                           40/94
The pleas in law and supporting arguments are the same as
those put forward in Case T-54/00 FCPG and Others v Council.
                                                                        Action brought on 6 April 2000 by Hänseler GmbH and
                                                                        Schuck GmbH against the Commission of the European
Action brought on 4 April 2000 by Rewe-Zentral AG                                                 Communities
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
              Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
                                                                                                 (Case T-83/00)
                         (Case T-79/00)
                                                                                                (2000/C 163/58)
                        (2000/C 163/57)
                                                                                          (Language of the case: German)
                  (Language of the case: German)
                                                                        An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal          ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the                 European Communities on 6 April 2000 by Hänseler GmbH,
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on                  of Konstanz, Germany, and Schuck GmbH, of Schwaig,
4 April 2000 by Rewe-Zentral AG, of Cologne (Federal                    Germany, represented by Burkhard Sträter, Rechtsanwalt,
Republic of Germany), represented by Maximilian Kinkeldey,              Bonn, Germany.
Rechtsanwalt, of Messrs Grünecker, Kinkeldey, Stockmair &
Schwarthäusser, Munich (Federal Republic of Germany).
                                                                        The applicants claim that the Court should:
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                        — annul Commission Decision K (2000) 608 of 9 March
— annul the decision adopted on 27 January 2000 by the                      2000;
    Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in
    the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) in the                — in the alternative, annul the Commission’s decision in so
    appeal proceedings registered under number R 275/                       far as Article 1 in conjunction with Annex I thereof
    1999-3;                                                                 requires the Member State Germany to withdraw the
                                                                            authorisations for the applicants’ medicinal products con-
— order the defendant to pay the costs.                                     taining norpseudoephredin;
 ---pagebreak--- C 163/30                EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                  10.6.2000
— order the Commission to pay the applicants’ necessary                  By the present application they seek annulment of the
    costs.                                                               Commission’s decision addressed to the Member States on
                                                                         withdrawal of authorisation for medicinal products for human
                                                                         use which contain that substance.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         The pleas in law and arguments adduced are essentially the
The applicants are pharmaceutical undertakings which market              same as in Case T-76/00.
medicinal products containing norpseudoephredin in various
Member States.
By the present application they seek annulment of the
Commission’s decision addressed to the Member States on
withdrawal of authorisation for medicinal products for human
use which contain that substance.
The pleas in law and arguments adduced are essentially the               Action brought on 6 April 2000 by Laboratórios Roussel,
same as in Case T-76/00.                                                 Limitada, and Roussel Iberica S.A. against the Commission
                                                                                         of the European Communities
                                                                                                  (Case T-85/00)
                                                                                                 (2000/C 163/60)
Action brought on 6 April 2000 by Laboratórios Roussel,
Limitada, and Laboratoires Roussel Diamant S.a.r.l. against
       the Commission of the European Communities                                          (Language of the case: German)
                          (Case T-84/00)
                                                                         An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                         ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                         (2000/C 163/59)                                 European Communities on 6 April 2000 by Laboratórios
                                                                         Roussel, Limitada, of Mem Martins Codex, Portugal, and
                                                                         Roussel Iberica S.A., of Barcelona, Spain, represented by
                   (Language of the case: German)
                                                                         Burkhard Sträter, Rechtsanwalt, Bonn, Germany.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the               The applicants claim that the Court should:
European Communities on 6 April 2000 by Laboratórios
Roussel, Limitada, of Mem Martins Codex, Portugal, and                   — annul Commission Decision K (2000) 608 of 9 March
Laboratoires Roussel Diamant S.a.r.l., of Puteaux, France,                   2000;
represented by Burkhard Sträter, Rechtsanwalt, Bonn, Ger-
many.                                                                    — in the alternative, annul the Commission’s decision in so
                                                                             far as Article 1 in conjunction with Annex I thereof
The applicants claim that the Court should:                                  requires the Member States Portugal and Spain to withdraw
                                                                             the authorisations for the applicants’ medicinal products
— annul Commission Decision K (2000) 608 of 9 March                          containing fenproporex;
    2000;
                                                                         — order the Commission to pay the applicants’ necessary
— in the alternative, annul the Commission’s decision in so                  costs.
    far as Article 1 in conjunction with Annex I thereof requires
    the Member States France and Portugal to withdraw
    the authorisations for the applicants’ medicinal products
    containing clobenzorex;                                              Pleas in law and main arguments
— order the Commission to pay the applicants’ necessary
    costs.                                                               The applicants are pharmaceutical undertakings which market
                                                                         medicinal products containing fenproporex in various Member
                                                                         States.
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         By the present application they seek annulment of the
The applicants are pharmaceutical undertakings which market              Commission’s decision addressed to the Member States on
medicinal products containing clobenzorex in various Member              withdrawal of authorisation for medicinal products for human
States.                                                                  use which contain that substance.