Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2015:879
Date: 2015-11-25
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Germany

Action brought on 9 April 2014 — Ewald Dörken v OHIM — Schürmann (VENT ROLL) (Case T-223/14) Language in which the application was lodged: German Parties Applicant: Ewald Dörken AG (Herdecke, Germany) (represented by: N. Grüger, lawyer) Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Wolfram Schürmann (Neuhausen, Switzerland) Form of order sought The applicant claims that the Court should: Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 January 2014 in Case R 2156/2012-4 and alter the contested decision to the effect that the application for a declaration of invalidity is dismissed in its entirety; In the alternative, annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 January 2014 in Case R 2156/2012-4 with regard to the goods in Class 6: ‘metal sheets for construction purposes’ and Class [1]7: ‘underlay sheets’ and alter the contested decision to the effect that the application for a declaration of invalidity is dismissed with regard to those goods; Order the defendant to pay the costs. Pleas in law and main arguments Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: the word mark ‘VENT ROLL’ for goods in Classes 6, 17 and 19 — Community trade mark No 3 817 491 Proprietor of the Community trade mark: the applicant Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: Wolfram Schürmann Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Absolute grounds for invalidity under Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation No 207/2009, bad faith under Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 and relative ground for invalidity of a mark registered by an agent without the proprietor’s consent pursuant to Article 53(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 Decision of the Cancellation Division: the application for a declaration of invalidity was granted Decision of the Board of Appeal: the appeal was dismissed Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 52(1) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 ; Infringement of Article 52(1) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(c) and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009; Infringement of Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Rule 40(3) of Regulation No 2868/95; Infringement of Articles 76 and 78 of Regulation No 207/2009 and Rules 37(b)(iv) and 57 of Regulation No 2868/95; Infringement of Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Rule 37(a)(iii) of Regulation No 2868/95 in conjunction with Article 83 of Regulation No 207/2009; Infringement of Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Rule 37(a)(iii) and (b)(i) of Regulation No 2868/95