Case T-141/02: Action brought on 3 May 2002 by Vetoquinol AG (formerly Chassot AG) against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Date: 2002-07-13
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), animal nutrition, trade mark, veterinary medicinal product

13.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 169/41

Action brought on 2 May 2002 by Sportwetten GmbH
Gera against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Decision of Board of
Appeal:

Dismissal of applicant’s appeal

Pleas in law:

(Case T-140/02)

(2002/C 169/72)

— The registered trade mark
designates services prohibit-
ed in Germany

— The use of the trade mark
for the services in respect
of which it is registered is
contrary to public policy and
of
accepted
morality
to
Article 7(1)(f) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94 (1).

principles
pursuant

— The Office failed to take
account of the requirement
as to use and the significance
of Article 106(2) of
the
Regulation.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

Action brought on 3 May 2002 by Vetoquinol AG
(formerly Chassot AG) against the Office for Harmonis-
ation in the Internal Market

(Case T-141/02)

(2002/C 169/73)

(Language of the case: English)

(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
of the Rules of Procedure — language in which the application was
submitted: German)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 2 May
2002 by Sportwetten GmbH Gera, residing in Gera (Germany),
represented by A. Zumschlinge, lawyer.

Intertops Sportwetten GmbH, Salzburg (Austria), was an
additional party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

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 21 February 2002 in appeal
no R 0338/2000-4 and the initial decision of the Office
for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 2 February
2000, ref.: C000422014/1;

— declare the Community trade mark with registration
no 000422014, the word and figurative mark ‘Intertops’,
void.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered trade mark in
respect of which a dec-
laration of nullity is munity trade mark 422014
sought:

Figurative mark ‘INTERTOPS’ for
services in Class 42 — Com-

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 3 May 2002 by Vetoquinol AG
(formerly Chassot AG), represented by Mr Axel Kockläuner of
Meissner, Bolte & Partner, Munich (Germany).

Proprietor of the Com-
munity trade mark:

Party applying for a dec-
laration of nullity of the
Community trade mark:

Trade mark or sign right
of applicant:

Decision of Cancellation
Division:

Intertops Sportwetten GmbH

The applicant

A further party before the Board of Appeal was VETO-Centre.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

German

The
word mark
‘INTERTOPS SPORTWETTEN’ for
services in Class 42

— annul the Decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
defendant dated 15 February 2002 in case no R 218/
2001 (‘the contested Decision’);

Dismissal of application

— order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the

defendant.

C 169/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.7.2002

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

The applicant

The Community trade
mark concerned:

Proprietor of the right to
the trade mark or sign
asserted by way of oppo-
sition in the opposition
proceedings:

Trade mark or
sign
asserted by way of oppo-
sition in the opposition
proceedings:

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Grounds of claim:

Verbal mark ‘BIO-CANISAN’ —
Application No 353 896, relating
to goods in classes 5 and 31
(veterinary preparations and food-
stuffs for animals)

VETO-Centre

French trade marks No 1582968
‘biocanina ’(word and device),
relating to goods in classes 5 and
31, and No 1350892 ‘BIOCANI-
NA’), relating to goods in class 5

Refusal of the application

Dismissal of the appeal

Infringement of Article 43(2),
third sentence, and Article 8(1)(b)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.

— annul the Commission’s decision dated 22 January 2001;

— order the Commission to compensate the applicants for
their loss of earnings and other benefits caused by the
breaches of Community law;

— order the Commission to pay the applicants’ costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants all worked in the JET Project as employees or
contractors to UK registered companies. According to the
applicants, however, they should have been recruited by the
Commission as temporary agents since they were part of the
JET Project Team.

The applicants claim that the failure of the Commission to
recruit the applicants as temporary agents was contrary the
JET statutes and constitutes an act ultra vires. According to the
applicants, the JET statutes did not provide for the possibility
of engaging staff who were working in the JET Project Team
through external contractors.

Furthermore, the applicants claim that the Commission dis-
criminated against them since this resulted in the applicants
being treated in a less favourable manner then those employed
by the Commission who were fulfilling substantially similar
roles in the JET Project.

Action brought on 7 May 2002 by Richard J. Eagle, John
G. Fanthome, Martin Gardener, Robert C. Walton, David
Sands, Alexander Gaberscik, Beryl Marrs, Clifford Marren,
Robert Felton, Carol Brickley, TF Atkins, Michael George
Grant and Edward Junger against the Commission of the
European Communities

(Case T-144/02)

(2002/C 169/74)

(Language of the case: English)

Action brought on 15 May 2002 by Sunrider Corporation
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-156/02)

(2002/C 169/75)

(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
of the Rules of Procedure — language in which the application was
submitted: German)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 7 May 2002 by Richard J. Eagle,
John G. Fanthome, Martin Gardener, Robert C. Walton, David
Sands, Alexander Gaberscik, Beryl Marrs, Clifford Marren,
Robert Felton, Carol Brickley, TF Atkins, Michael George Grant
and Edward Junger, represented by Mr Daniel Beard of
Monckton Chambers, London (United Kingdom).

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
15 May 2002 by Sunrider Corporation, Torrance (USA),
represented by A. Kockläuner, lawyer.

Frieslands Brands B.V., Leeuwarden (the Netherlands) was an
additional party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.