Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2013:150
Date: 2013-03-22
Language of the case: Polish
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Poland

Action brought on 16 December 2010 - Fabryka Łożysk Tocznych-Kraśnik v OHIM - Impexmetal (FŁT-1) (Case T -571/10) Language in which the application was lodged: Polish Parties Applicant: Fabryka Łożysk Tocznych-Kraśnik S.A. (Kraśnik, Poland) (represented by: J. Sieklucki, lawyer) Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Impexmetal S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) Form of order sought annul in its entirety the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 October 2010 in Case R 1387/2009-1; order OHIM and IMPEXMETAL S.A. to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs incurred by the applicant in its action before the Board of Appeal and the Opposition Division of OHIM. Pleas in law and main arguments Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant Community trade mark concerned: figurative trade mark 'FŁT-1' for goods in Class 7 - application no 5026372 Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: IMPEXMETAL S.A. Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community figurative trade marks 'FŁT' and national verbal and figurative trade marks 'FŁT' for goods in Class 7 Decision of the Opposition Division: opposition upheld in part and trade-mark application rejected in respect of several goods in Class 7 Decision of the Board of Appeal: appeal brought against the decision of the Opposition Division dismissed Pleas in law: breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 1 by reason of a misappraisal of the similarity of the opposing marks; failure to have regard for the fact that the trade mark applied for constitutes part of the name of the applicant company, which has been used long before the date of the application, and is a historically well-founded designation distinguishing the applicant; and failure to take account of the long-lasting and peaceful co-existence of the trade mark applied for and the trade marks cited in opposition. ____________ 1 - Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version) (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).