Order — ECLI:EU:T:2013:576
Date: 2013-10-24
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: United Kingdom

Action brought on 18 October 2012 - Stromberg Menswear v OHIM - Leketoy Stormberg Inter (STORMBERG) (Case T-457/12) Language in which the application was lodged: English Parties Applicant: Stromberg Menswear Ltd (Leeds, United Kingdom) (represented by: A. Tsoutsanis, lawyer, and C. Tulley, Solicitor) Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Leketoy Stormberg Inter AS (Kristiansand S, Norway) 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 3 August 2012 in case R 428/2012-4; Alter the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 3 August 2012 in case R 428/2012-4 and grant the request for re-establishment of rights, and i) primarily, annul the decision of OHIM to allow conversion, or, ii) alternatively, allow Stromberg Menswear to appeal the decision of OHIM to allow the conversion and refer the appeal back to the Board of Appeal; and Order OHIM to pay any and all costs and legal fees incurred by Stromberg Menswear in connection with the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and before the General Court. Pleas in law and main arguments Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made: The word mark "STORMBERG", for goods and services in class 25 - Community trade mark registration No 2557155 Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal Party applying for revocation of the Community trade mark: The applicant Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declared the cancellation proceedings closed following a surrender of the contested CTM by its proprietor Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal as inadmissible Pleas in law: - Infringement of Articles 57 to 60 of Council Regulation No 207/2009 and Rule 48(1)(c) of Commission Regulation No 2868/95; - Infringement of Article 81 of Council Regulation No 207/2009; - Infringement of Article 75 of Council Regulation No 207/2009. ____________