Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 July 2002 in Case T-323/00: SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark — "SAT. 2" — Absolute grounds for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Equal treatment)
Date: 2002-08-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), audiovisual industry, broadcasting, database, film industry, mass media, programmes industry, recording medium

24.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 202/23

1. Dismisses the action in so far as it relates to the category of
documents constituted by the minutes of the meetings of the
cancer experts committee assessing the international scientific
research;

2.

Finds that there is no need to proceed to judgment on the
remainder of the case;

3. Orders the Commission in addition to bearing its own costs, to
pay those of the applicant, save for costs relating to the request
for the oral procedure to be re-opened. The Commission is also
ordered to pay the costs connected with the summoning of
witnesses.

(1) OJ C 355 of 9.12.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 2 July 2002

in Case T-323/00: SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH
v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — ‘SAT. 2’ — Absolute grounds
for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Equal treatment)

(2002/C 202/34)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-323/00, SAT.1 SatellitenFernsehen GmbH, estab-
lished in Mainz (Germany), represented by R. Schneider,
lawyer, v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: A. von Mühlendahl
and C. Røhl Søberg): Action brought against the decision of
the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation
in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 August
2000 (Case R 312/1999-2), the Court of First Instance (Second
Chamber), composed of: R.M. Moura Ramos, President, J. Pir-
rung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges; J. Plingers, Administrator, for
the Registrar, has given a judgment on 2 July 2002, in which
it:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office
for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) of 2 August 2000 (Case R 312/1999-2) in so far
as the Board failed to rule on the appeal before it as regards the
services within Class 35;

2. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office
for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) of 2 August 2000 (Case R 312/1999-2) in so far
as the Board dismissed the appeal before it as regards the
following categories of services:

— ‘Services relating to a database’ within Class 38;

rental of

— ‘Production and reproduction of data, speech, text, sound
and image recordings on video and/or audio cassettes,
tapes and discs (including CD-ROMs and CD-i’s) and of
video games (computer games); demonstration and rental
of video and/or audio cassettes, tapes and discs (including
CD-ROMs and CD-i’s) and of video games (computer
television receiving apparatus and
games);
decoders; education, providing of training, entertainment;
sporting and cultural activities; conducting competitions
in the fields of training, teaching, entertainment and
sports; distance learning courses; publishing books, per-
iodicals and other printed matter and associated electronic
media (including CD-ROMs and CD-i’s); conducting
concert, theatre and entertainment events and sporting
competitions; production of films and videos and radio
and television programmes of a training, teaching and
entertaining nature, including such production for children
and young people; production, reproduction, showing and
rental of sound and image recordings on video and/or
audio cassettes, tapes and discs; theatrical performances
and orchestra services’ within Class 41;

— ‘Issuing, negotiating, rental and other exploitation of
rights to films, television and video productions and other
image and sound programmes; copyright and industrial
property rights exploitation for others; exploitation of film
and television ancillary rights in the field of merchandis-
ing; software development, in particular in the fields of
multimedia, interactive television and Pay-TV; operation
of networks for the transfer of messages, images, text,
speech and data; technical consultancy in the field of
multimedia, interactive television and Pay-TV (included
including video
in class 42); computer programming,
and computer games; arranging and allocating of user
passwords for users of various communication networks’
within Class 42;

3. Dismisses the remainder of the application;

4. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 4 of 6.1.2001.