Case T-185/02: Action brought on 13 June 2002 by Succession Picasso against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Date: 2002-08-24
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), motor car, spare part

C 202/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

24.8.2002

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decisions of 22.3.02 of the OHIM’s First Board
in Case 115/2000-1 and 15.11.99 of the

of Appeal
OHIM’s Opposition Division;

— allow registration of Community Trade Mark No 557108
‘mundicolor’ to proceed in respect of all services in
Class 39 ‘transport services and travel arrangements’
and Class 42 ‘providing of food and drink; temporary
accommodation’;

— order the opponent(s) to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 13 June 2002 by Succession Picasso
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

(Case T-185/02)

(2002/C 202/56)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 13 June 2002 by Succession
Picasso, represented by Charles Gielen,
lawyer. A further
party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal was
DaimlerChrysler AG (Intellectual Property Management).

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

The applicant.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Community trade mark Word mark MUNDICOR (appli-
cation published in Community
applied for:
Trade Mark Bulletin No 27/98,
for
p. 600 of 14 April 1998)
goods
the
in 42 classes of
nomenclature.

Owner of the mark or
sign relied on in the
opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign opposed:

IBERIA Lı´neas Aéreas de Espan˜ a
S.A.

Spanish word mark MUNDICO-
LOR for goods in Class 39 (pass-
enger transport services, excur-
sions and tourist promotions) and
42 (hotel accommodation ser-
vices,
travel arrangements and
organisation of holidays).
Mixed international mark MUNDI
COLOR, extended to France, Italy,
Austria and the Benelux countries
for ‘travel planning services and
organisation of travel’ in Class 39
involving hotel
and ‘services
accommodation and food’
in
Class 42.

Decision of
sition division:

the oppo-

Application allowed.

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Dismissal of the appeal brought
by El Corte Inglés S.A.

Grounds relied on:

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (like-
lihood of confusion).

— annul the Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of
18 March 2002 and of the Opposition Division of
11 January 2001;

— declare that the opposition filed by the applicant against
the application for registration of the mark PICARO is
successful and refuse the application for the mark in its
entirety and/or make any other order that the Court
deems fit;

— order DaimlerChrysler to pay all costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

DaimlerChrysler

The Community trade Word mark ‘PICARO’ — Appli-
cation No 927764, relating to
mark sought:
goods in Class 12 (vehicles and
parts thereof).

Proprietor of the trade
mark or sign right cited
in the opposition pro-
ceedings:

Succession Picasso.

Trade mark or sign right
The word mark ‘PICASSO’ (Com-
cited in the opposition munity trade mark registration
proceedings:

No 614567).

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:Rejection
of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Dismissal of the appeal.

Grounds of claim:

24.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 202/35

Incorrect application of
Article 8(1)(b) of Regu-
lation No 40/94:

likelihood of confusion exists
because of the undisputed identity
or, at least, similarity of the goods,
the visual and phonetic similarity
of the marks and the inherent
distinctiveness of the mark cited
in opposition.

Action brought on 17 June 2002 by Freiberger Lebensmit-
tel GmbH & Co. Produktions- und Vertriebs KG against
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-188/02)

(2002/C 202/57)

the

case to be determined in accordance with
(Language of
Article 131(2) of the Rules of Procedure Language in which the
application was made: 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
17 June 2002 by Freiberger Lebensmittel GmbH & Co.
Produktions- und Vertriebs KG, of Berlin, Germany, represent-
ed by K.-D. Rathke. Roberto S.A. of Chevilly, France, was an
additional party 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 of
28.2.2002 in Case R 1155/2000-4;

— order the opponent to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Mark invoked in the
opposition proceedings:

Decision of
sition division:

the oppo-

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Pleas in law relied on:

International mark No 516269
‘Roberto’ for goods in Classes 29
and 30 and the opponent’s trading
name ‘ROBERTO’

Dismissal of the opposition

Annulment of the decision of the
opposition division and remittal
of the application

— Infringement of Rule 16 of
Regulation (EC) No 2868/
95 (1);
— Infringement

of
Article 42(1), in conjunction
with Article 8(2) and (4),
of Regulation (EC) No 40/
94 (2).

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December
1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the
Community trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).

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

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

Action brought on 17 June 2002 by Anita Jannice O¨ ster-
holm against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-190/02)

(2002/C 202/58)

(Language of the case: French)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 17 June 2002 by Anita Jannice
O¨ sterholm, residing in Stockholm, represented by Juan Ramon
Iturriagagoitia Bassas, lawyer.

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

The applicant

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Trade mark applied for:

Word mark ‘Alberto’ for goods in
Classes 29 and 30 — Application
No 26211

— annul

the decision of

the appointing authority of
11 March 2002 replying to complaint No 389/01 lodged
by J. O¨ sterholm;

Proprietor of the trade
invoked in
mark right
the opposition proceed-
ings:

Roberto S.A.

— annul in part the decision of the Directorate General for
Personnel and Administration of the European Com-
mission of 2 July 2001 concerning the computation of
annual leave between 8 and 31 July 2000;