ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
12 October 2009 (*)
(Legal aid)
In Case T‑206/09 AJ,
Pavel Maslyukov, residing in London (United Kingdom),
applicant,
v
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), represented by D. Botis, acting as Agent,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM being Diageo Scotland Limited, established in Edinburgh (United Kingdom),
APPLICATION for legal aid under Article 95 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
makes the following
Order
1 By application lodged at the Registry of the Court of First Instance on 14 May 2009, the applicant submitted an application for legal aid, prior to bringing proceedings before the Court for the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 11 March 2009 (Case R 1194/2008-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Maslyukov and Diageo Scotland Limited.
2 By letter received at the Registry of the Court on 29 June 2009, OHIM submitted its observations on the application for legal aid, in accordance with Article 96(1) of the Rules of Procedure. In those observations, OHIM submitted that legal aid ought not to be granted, on the ground that the conditions set out in Articles 94 and 95 of the Rules of Procedure and in Article 19 of the Statute of the Court of Justice were not satisfied.
3 By letter of 16 July 2009, the Court called on the applicant, in accordance with Article 64 of the Rules of Procedure, to produce all documents which might supplement the information already provided concerning his economic situation, such as a certificate from a competent authority. Specifically, the Court asked Mr Maslyukov to provide all information concerning, first, any other bank accounts that he might have, second, his links with the company Hispaniola Brands Ltd, and, third, any business activities which he might be carrying out through other undertakings. The applicant did not, however, reply in proper form within the period prescribed.
4 Under Article 94(2) of the Rules of Procedure, any natural person who, because of his economic situation, is wholly or partly unable to meet the costs of proceedings is entitled to legal aid. The economic situation of that person is assessed taking into account objective factors such as income, capital and family situation.
5 Furthermore, under Article 95(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the application for legal aid must be accompanied by all information and supporting documents which make it possible to assess the applicant’s economic situation, such as a certificate issued by the competent national authority attesting to his economic situation.
6 In the present case, Mr Maslyukov states that since January 2009 he has been unemployed and has not been earning any income. For the purposes of establishing his economic situation, his application for legal aid is accompanied by two documents: a bank account statement in respect of the period from 1 April to 6 May 2009 and a card account statement covering the period from 21 March to 20 April 2009.
7 It must be noted at the outset that the analysis of those two documents indicates a lack of clarity in entries on Mr Maslyukov’s account and inconsistencies with regard to his professional situation, as described by him on the application form for legal aid.
8 First, a significant number of expenses linked to travel in the United States appear on the account statement produced. In addition, the account is credited with a cash payment from an unspecified source. Lastly, there is nothing to indicate that the account from which the statement is taken belongs to the applicant.
9 Second, the card account statement provided by the applicant is linked to a different account from that referred to on the bank account statement. In addition, the transactions listed on the card account statement show expenses relating to, inter alia, a car rental and air travel. The applicant does not provide any justification for these either.
10 The absence of any explanation, first, of the various financial transactions and, second, of the nature of the expenses in the light of the applicant’s professional situation thus stands in the way of any understanding of the documents provided in support of the application for legal aid. In any event, documents of this type do not make it possible to build up a full picture of the applicant’s economic situation.
11 Lastly, Mr Maslyukov has not produced any explanatory document concerning his links with the company Hispaniola Brands Ltd.
12 In the light of the foregoing, it must be stated that Mr Maslyukov has not established, on the basis of the documents in the file, that he was wholly or partly unable to meet the costs connected to the action which he intends to bring.
13 Mr Maslyukov’s application for legal aid must accordingly be rejected.
On those grounds,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
hereby orders:
The application for legal aid in Case T-206/09 AJ is rejected.
Luxembourg, 12 October 2009.