Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 October 2002 in Case T-388/00: Institut für Lernsysteme GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Earlier figurative mark containing the acronym ILS — Application for Community word mark ELS — Proof of use of earlier mark — Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Statement of reasons)
Date: 2003-01-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Germany, action for annulment (EU), book trade, school textbook, trade mark

C 19/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2003

Case T-178/00, J. Fernández Martín, V. Saintot and B. Wägen-
baur, and, in Case T-341/00, V. Saintot, T. Gulliams and
Wägenbaur): Application for annulment of the applicant’s
performance appraisal report for 1999, in Case T-178/00, and
for annulment of the note of 28 June 2000 from the Director-
General of the Directorate-General for Information Systems
(DG IS) of the European Central Bank concerning the duties
allocated to the applicant, in Case T-341/00, the Court of First
Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of: J.D. Cooke, President,
R. García-Valdecasas and P. Lindh, Judges; D. Christensen,
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
22 October 2002, in which it:

1. Orders that Cases T-178/00 and T-341/00 shall be joined

for the purposes of the judgment;

Economic Area Agreement (Case COMP/JV 40 Canal+/Lagard-
ère and COMP/JV 47 Canal+/Lagardère/Liberty Media), the
Court of First Instance (Third Chamber, Extended Compo-
sition), composed of M. Jaeger, President, R. García-Valdecasas,
K. Lenaerts, P. Lindh and J. Azizi, Judges; J. Palacio González,
Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 20 Nov-
ember 2002, in which it:

1.

annuls the Commission’s decision of 10 July 2000 amending
the decision of the Commission of 22 June 2000 declaring a
concentration compatible with the common market and with
the European Economic Area Agreement (Case COMP/JV
40 Canal+/Lagardère and COMP/JV 47 Canal+/Lagardère/
Liberty Media);

2. Dismisses the applications in Cases T-178/00 and T-341/00;

2.

orders the defendant to pay the costs.

3. Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

(1) OJ C 335 of 25.11.2000.

( 1) OJ C 259 of 9.9.2000.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 20 November 2002

of 23 October 2002

in Case T-251/00: Lagardère SCA and Canal+ SA v
Commission of the European Communities (1)

in Case T-388/00: Institut für Lernsysteme GmbH v Office
for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Competition — Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 — Modifi-
cation of a decision declaring a concentration compatible
with the common market — Restrictions directly related
and necessary to the implementation of the concentration
(‘Ancillary restrictions’) — Action for annulment — Chal-
lengeable acts — Legal interest in bringing proceedings —
Legal certainty — Legitimate expectations — Reasons)

(2003/C 19/55)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-251/00: Lagardère SCA, established in Paris, rep-
resented by A. Winckler, avocat, with an address for service in
Luxembourg, Canal+ SA, established in Paris, represented
by J.-P. de La Laurencie and P.-M. Louis, avocats, against
Commission of the European Communities (Agents: W. Wils
and F. Lelièvre) — application for annulment of the Com-
mission’s decision of 10 July 2000 amending the decision of
the Commission of 22 June 2000 declaring a concentration
compatible with the common market and with the European

(Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Earlier
figurative mark containing the acronym ILS — Application
for Community word mark ELS — Proof of use of earlier
mark — Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94
and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 — Relative
ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Statement of reasons)

(2003/C 19/56)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-388/00, Institut für Lernsysteme GmbH, established
in Hamburg (Germany), represented by J. Schneider and
A. Buddee, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg,
v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: A. von Mühlendahl, A. di Carlo
and O. Waelbroeck), the other party to the proceedings before

25.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 19/31

the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being ELS
Educational Services, Inc., established in Culver City, California
(United States): Action brought against the decision of the
Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 18 October
2000 (Case R 074/2000-3), the Court of First Instance (Fourth
Chamber), composed of: M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and
P. Mengozzi, Judges; D. Christensen, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 October 2002, in which
it:

1. Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office
for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) (OHIM) of 18 October 2000 (Case R 074/2000-
3) in so far as it relates to the analysis of the likelihood of
confusion between the conflicting marks;

2.

For the rest, dismisses the application;

3. Orders the defendant to bear its own costs and pay two thirds
of the costs incurred by the applicant. The applicant shall bear
one third of its own costs.

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 31 October 2000 (Joined Cases R 728/1999-
2 and R 792/1999-2), relating to opposition proceedings
between Hukla Germany SA and Matratzen Concord GmbH,
the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed
of: M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and P. Mengozzi, Judges;
D. Christensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
judgment on 23 October 2002, in which it:

1. Dismisses the application;

2. Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 108 of 7.4.2001.

( 1) OJ C 79 of 10.3.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 23 October 2002

in Case T-6/01: Matratzen Concord GmbH v Office for
Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition — Relative grounds
for refusal — Similarity between two trade marks —
Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94 — Application for a figurative Community
trade mark containing the word ‘Matratzen’ — Earlier word
trade mark MATRATZEN)

(2003/C 19/57)

(Language of the case: German)

In Case T-6/01, Matratzen Concord GmbH, formerly Matratzen
Concord AG, established in Cologne (Germany), represented
by W.-W. Wodrich, avocat, v Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents:
A. von Mühlendahl, G. Schneider and E. Joly): Action brought
against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the

of 20 November 2002

in Joined Cases T-79/01 and T-86/01: Robert Bosch GmbH
v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — Kit Pro and Kit Super Pro —
Absolute grounds for refusal — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94)

(2003/C 19/58)

(Language of the case: German)

In Joined Cases T-79/01 and T-86/01, Robert Bosch GmbH,
established in Stuttgart (Germany), represented by S. Völker,
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v Com-
mission of the European Communities (Agent: G. Schneider):
Actions brought against two decisions of the First Board of
Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 31 January 2001 (Cases R 124/
2000-1 and R 123/2000-1) on the registration of Kit Pro and
Kit Super Pro respectively as Community trade marks, the
Court of First
Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of:
M. Vilaras, President, V. Tiili and P. Mengozzi, Judges; D. Chris-
tensen, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment
on 20 November 2002, in which it: