T-236/02
- Súd
- Všeobecný súd Európskej únie
- IČS
- 62002TN0236
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
C 233/34 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 28.9.2002
The applicant claims that the Court should: — Registration of the Scala Inc’s Community trade mark application is an infringe- — annul the First Board of Appeal’s decision of 27 May ment of Article 8(1) of 2002 in Case R 830/2001-1; Council Regulation No 40/ 94, as the applicant is the — remit the case to the First Board of Appeal; owner of two earlier and identical trade marks which are registered for identical or — order each party to bear its own costs. similar goods.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Action brought on 8 August 2002 by Luigi Marcuccio Applicant for the Com- Scala Inc., USA against the Commission of the European Communities munity trade mark: (Case T-236/02) The Community trade Word mark SCALA for ‘computer mark concerned: software’ in class 9. (2002/C 233/60)
Proprietor to the right to The Applicant (Language of the case: Italian) the trade mark or sign asserted by way of oppo- sition in the opposition proceedings: An action against the Commission of the European Communi- ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 8 August 2002 by Luigi Marcuccio, Trade mark or sign Danish trade mark registration no. asserted by way of oppo- VR 1300 1989 SCALA (word represented by Luciano Garofalo, lawyer. sition in the opposition mark), registered on 17 March proceedings: 1989, and German trade mark The applicant claims that the Court should: registration no. 2059843 SCALA (Word mark), registered on — annul the decision changing the ‘affectation de l’emploi 15 March 1994. These two marks A7/A6 et de son titulaire M. Luigi Marcuccio (n. Personnel are registered for a range of goods 048092), fonctionnaire de grade A7’ (‘transferring the in classes 9 and 16. The appli- A6/A7 post and its holder, Mr Luigi Marcuccio (Staff cant’s opposition was based on No 048092), a grade A7 official’) from the Directorate- some of the goods for which General for Development, Commission’s Delegation in the earlier mark was registered, Luanda (Angola) to the Directorate-General for Develop- specifically ‘counterprograms sto- ment in Brussels; the said decision was adopted by the red on datacarriers’ and ‘date pro- Director-General for Development, Mr Koos Richelle, on cessing programs stored on data 18 March 2002; carriers’ in class 9, and was direct- ed against all the goods specified — order the defendant: in Scala Inc’s application — to pay compensation for the non-material, existen- Decision of the Oppo- Refusal of the application tial, biological, physical, psychological and material sition Division: damage suffered by the applicant as a result of the decision contested in these proceedings, in the sum of 100 000 (one hundred thousand) euros or such Decision of the Board of Refusal of he application greater or lesser sum as the Court may think fair and Appeal: equitable;
Grounds of claim: — The documents submitted by — to pay all the salary-related allowances connected the Applicant to the Oppo- with the performance by the said Marcuccio of his sition Division did comply duties in Angola, with effect from the date on which with Rule 16(2) of Regu- his transfer took effect (1 April 2002), together with lation (EC) No. 2868/95, interest thereon at the rate of 10 % per annum, implementing Council Regu- compounded annually; lation No 40/94, on the Community Trade Mark — to pay the costs.
28.9.2002 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 233/35
Pleas in law and main arguments Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant in the present case is contesting the decision to By application of 15 April 2002 the applicant, a manufacturer transfer him from the Commission’s delegation in Luanda to of special glass, requested, pursuant to Article 6(1) of Regu- the Directorate-General for Development in Brussels. That lation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of decision is allegedly connected with illness caused by personal the Council (1), access to documents relating to various State conflicts in which he was involved within the said delegation aid procedures. Two of those procedures concerned the in Luanda. applicant itself as a presumed recipient of State aid; the others concerned one of its competitors on the special glass markets, In support of his claims, the applicant pleads: the firm Schott Glass. The applicant’s action is directed at the Commission’s decision of 28 May 2002 in so far as it refuses — failure to provide a statement of reasons, inasmuch as the to grant access to the documents in the aid procedures mere reference to the interests of the service cannot be concerning the applicant itself and in procedures concerning regarded as satisfactory in that respect; Schott Glass and are already completed.
— infringement of the principle of proper administration, The applicant submits that the Commission’s refusal manifestly alternatively failure to discharge the duty to have regard infringes Article 2(1) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/ for the welfare and interests of officials; 2001. The applicant had a right to access which was not restricted by Article 4 of the regulation. In particular, the — non-compliance with the principle that the interested Commission had not proved the existence of any specific party should be heard in advance of the adoption of a impairment of the protected interests set out in Article 4(2) of decision, inasmuch as the contested decision was taken the regulation. without any prior notice to the person concerned;
— the decision at issue is indicative in several respects of a Furthermore, the applicant submits that the Commission misuse of powers, since it is apparent from the overall wrongly relied on the exception relating to the protection of circumstances of the case that the objective actually the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits. Referring pursued was not of a merely organisational nature but to Article 4(7) of the regulation, the applicant submits that it was to distance the applicant from Angola and from the has at the very least the right to access to documents in functions which he was responsible for performing there. examination procedures which have already been completed. Moreover, it ought to have been possible for the Commission to grant the applicant access to a document in which business secrets had been obscured and thus to grant partial access in accordance with Article 4(6) of the regulation.
Action brought on 8 August 2002 by Technische Glaswer- Finally, the Commission infringed its obligation to state ke Ilmenau GmbH against the Commission of the Euro- reasons in accordance with Article 253 EC, since it had merely pean Communities given a general statement of reasons.
(Case T-237/02) (1 ) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to (2002/C 233/61) European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145 p. 43). (Language of the case: German)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi- ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 8 August 2002 by Technische Action brought on 9 August 2002 by José Barbosa Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH, whose registered office is at Gonçalves against Commission of the European Com- Ilmenau (Germany), represented by G. Schohe and Ch. Arhold, munities lawyers, acting as agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg. (Case T-238/02)
The applicant claims that the Court should (2002/C 233/62) — annul the Commission’s decision of 28 May 2002 (Language of the case: Portuguese) concerning the applicant’s application for access to documents — D(2002) 330168 — except for the part in which access is refused to documents directly connected with the pending aid procedure concerning Schott; An action against the Commission of the European Communi- ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the — order the defendant to pay the costs. European Communities on 9 August 2002 by José Barbosa