CELEX: C2003/019/70
Language: en
Date: 2003-01-25 00:00:00
Title: Case T-333/02: Action brought on 31 October 2002 by the Gestoras Pro Amnistía association, Juan Mari Olano Olano and Julen Zelarain Errasti against Council of the European Union

C 19/36                 EN                         Official Journal of the European Communities                                     25.1.2003
President of the Court of First Instance made an order on                     In that regard, the applicant takes the view that, having failed
17 October 2002, the operative part of which is as follows:                   to adopt general rules authorising the reversal of management
                                                                              duties, the Secretary General improperly adopted the contested
                                                                              decision. The duties actually carried out by the applicant since
1.    The application for interim relief is rejected.                         the adoption of that decision are moreover manifestly inferior
                                                                              to those normally carried out by an official in Grade A 3.
2.    Costs are reserved.
                                                                              Action brought on 31 October 2002 by the Gestoras Pro
Action brought on 14 October 2002 by Michel Soubies                           Amnistía association, Juan Mari Olano Olano and Julen
    against Commission of the European Communities                              Zelarain Errasti against Council of the European Union
                          (Case T-325/02)                                                             (Case T-333/02)
                          (2003/C 19/69)                                                               (2003/C 19/70)
                    (Language of the case: French)                                               (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                     An action against the Council of the European Union was
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                    brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
European Communities on 14 October 2002 by Michel                             Communities on 31 October 2002 by the Gestoras Pro
Soubies, residing in Brussels, represented by Albert Coolen,                  Amnistía association, whose offices are in Hernani (Spain),
Jean-Noël Louis and Etienne Marchal, avocats.                                 Juan Mari Olano Olano, residing in Gainza (Spain), and Julen
                                                                              Zelarain Errasti, residing in San Sebastián (Spain), represented
                                                                              by Didier Rouget, lawyer.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                              The applicants claim that the Court should:
—     annul the decision of 26 November 2001 of the Secretary
      General of the Commission posting the applicant, as A
                                                                              —     order the defendant to pay compensation amounting to
      3 adviser ad personam, to Unit SG/F.2 ‘Institutional
                                                                                    EUR 1 000 000 to the Gestoras Pro Amnistía association
      matters’;
                                                                                    and EUR 100 000 to each of the other two applicants,
                                                                                    Juan Mari Olano Olano and Julen Zelarain Errasti;
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.
                                                                              —     find that those amounts give rise to default interest at the
                                                                                    rate of 4.5 % per annum with effect from the date of the
                                                                                    judgment of the Court of First Instance and until actual
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                     payment is effected;
                                                                              —     order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay
The applicant, an official in Grade A 3, is challenging the                         those incurred by the applicants.
decision of the appointing authority to appoint him adviser ad
personam in Unit SG/F.2 ‘Institutional matters’, where the
head of unit was appointed in Grade A 5.
                                                                              Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of his claims, he alleges:
                                                                              The Gestoras Pro Amnistía association and two representatives
—     breach of the obligation to state reasons;                              are seeking compensation for the damage allegedly suffered as
                                                                              a result of the abovementioned association’s name having been
—     breach of the procedure for filling middle-management                   included in the list of terrorist persons, groups and bodies,
      posts, infringement of Articles 4, 5, 27 and 29 of the                  pursuant to Common Position 2001/931/CFSP ( 1), adopted on
      Staff Regulations and breach of the principles of good                  27 December 2001, confirmed by Council Common Position
      management and sound administration and of the prin-                    2002/340/CFSP (2), adopted on 2 May 2001, and Council
      ciple that officials should have reasonable career pros-                Common Position 2002/940/CFSP (3), adopted on 17 June
      pects.                                                                  2002.
 ---pagebreak--- 25.1.2003               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 19/37
The pleas in law and main arguments put forward are identical              Pleas in law and main arguments
to those in Case T-338/02.
                                                                           The pleas in law submitted are identical to those in Case
( 1) Common Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001 on the              T-326/02.
     application of specific measures to combat terrorism, OJ L 344,
     of 28.12.2001, p. 93.
( 2) Council Common Position of 2 May 2002 updating Common
     Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures
     to combat terrorism, OJ L 116, of 3.5.2002, p. 75.
( 3) Council Common Position of 17 June 2002 updating Common
     Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures
     to combat terrorism and repealing Common Position 2002/340/
     CFSP, OJ L 160, of 18.6.2002, p. 32.
                                                                           Action brought on 8 November 2002 by Metro-Goldwin-
                                                                           Mayer Lion Corporation against the Office for Harmon-
                                                                                            ization in the Internal Market
                                                                                                   (Case T-342/02)
Action brought on 13 November 2002 by B.V. Bureau                                                   (2003/C 19/72)
Wijsmuller Scheepvaart-Transport en Zeesleepvaart
Maatschappij against the Commission of the European
                             Communities                                                      (Language of the case: English)
                           (Case T-340/02)
                                                                           An action against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal
                            (2003/C 19/71)                                 Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                           European Communities on 8 November 2002 by Metro-
                                                                           Goldwin-Mayer Lion Corporation, Santa Monica, California
                     (Language of the case: Dutch)                         (United States of America), represented by Fernand de Visscher,
                                                                           Emmanuel Cornu, Eric De Gryse, Donatienne Moreau, avocats.
                                                                           A further party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
                                                                           was Moser Grupo Media, S.L., Santa Eulalia Del Rio (Baleares -
                                                                           Spain).
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 13 November 2002 by B.V.
                                                                           The applicant claims that the Court should:
Bureau Wijsmuller Scheepvaart-Transport en Zeesleepvaart
Maatschappij, with its registered office in IJsmuiden (Nether-
lands), represented by M.J.J.M. Essers.                                    —     uphold the claim for annulment;
                                                                           —     annul the Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                      5 September 2002;
(1) Primarily, annul the Commission’s decision of 19 June                  —     confirm the decision of the Opposition Division of
       2002 (C(2002) 2158 final) concerning State aid provided                   19 February 2001 insofar as it upholds the Opposition
       by the Netherlands for the activities of Netherlands                      number B 47730 for all the contested goods and services
       tugboats operating within seaports and on inland water-                   and rejects application for registration no 409664 in its
       ways of the Community;                                                    entirety on the basis of applicant’s national registrations
                                                                                 of the trademark ‘MGM’;
(2) In the alternative, annul Articles 2 and 3 of the contested
       Commission decision, in which the Commission requires               —     annul the decision of the Opposition Division of 19 Feb-
       the Netherlands Government inter alia to adopt all                        ruary 2001 insofar as it does not admit as ground for
       measures necessary to recover the aid from recipients,                    rejection applicant’s CTM no 141820 of the trademark
       with the exception of that aid which was granted prior to                 ‘MGM’ or, in subsidiary order, insofar as it does not admit
       12 September 1990;                                                        as ground for rejection the earlier national trade mark
                                                                                 registrations in Austria, Greece and the United Kingdom;
(3) Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceed-
       ings.                                                               —     condemn the Office to the costs of the proceedings.