Case T-184/02: Action brought on 11 June 2002 by El Corte Inglés, S.A. 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), carriage of passengers, provision of services, tourism, travel

24.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 202/33

Grounds of claim:

— Irregularity of the procedure
in that the appeal was reas-
signed to another Board of
appeal and that the applicant
the
was not
informed of
change of name of
the
opponent.

— Failure of

the Board of
Appeal to provide reasons
for its decision.

— Breach of

the concept of

‘likelihood of confusion’.

— Misuse of

rights by the
opponent in that it has not
made any use of the mark
objected to.

Action brought on 11 June 2002 by El Corte Inglés, S.A.
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

(Case T-183/02)

(2002/C 202/54)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

The applicant.

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

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

Mark or sign opposed:

Gonza´lez Cabello S.A.

Spanish mark MUNDICOLOR for
goods in class 2 (colours, varnish-
es, lacquers, preservatives against
rust and against deterioration of
wood; colorants; mordants; raw
natural resins; metals in foil and
powder form for painters, decor-
ators, printers and artists).

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.

Pleas in law relied on:

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

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 11 June 2002 by El Corte Inglés,
S.A. of Madrid, represented by Juan Luis Rivas Zurdo.

Action brought on 11 June 2002 by El Corte Inglés, S.A.
against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of 22.3.02 of OHIM’s First Board of
Appeal and the decision of 17.9.99 of OHIM’s opposition
division;

— allow registration of Community Trade Mark No 557108
‘MUNDICOR’ to proceed for all goods claimed in Class 2;

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

(Case T-184/02)

(2002/C 202/55)

(Language of the case: Spanish)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 11 June 2002 by El Corte Inglés,
S.A. of Madrid, represented by Juan Luis Rivas Zurdo.

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: