Case T-342/02: Action brought on 8 November 2002 by Metro-Goldwin-Mayer Lion Corporation against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market
Date: 2003-01-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), audiovisual equipment, audiovisual production, audiovisual programme, broadcasting, film production, pulp and paper industry, trade-mark law

25.1.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 19/37

The pleas in law and main arguments put forward are identical
to those in Case T-338/02.

Pleas in law and main arguments

( 1) Common Position 2001/931/CFSP of 27 December 2001 on the
application of specific measures to combat terrorism, OJ L 344,
of 28.12.2001, p. 93.

( 2) Council Common Position of 2 May 2002 updating Common
Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures
to combat terrorism, OJ L 116, of 3.5.2002, p. 75.

( 3) Council Common Position of 17 June 2002 updating Common
Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures
to combat terrorism and repealing Common Position 2002/340/
CFSP, OJ L 160, of 18.6.2002, p. 32.

Action brought on 13 November 2002 by B.V. Bureau
Wijsmuller Scheepvaart-Transport
en Zeesleepvaart
Maatschappij against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-340/02)

(2003/C 19/71)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 13 November 2002 by B.V.
Bureau Wijsmuller Scheepvaart-Transport en Zeesleepvaart
Maatschappij, with its registered office in IJsmuiden (Nether-
lands), represented by M.J.J.M. Essers.

The pleas in law submitted are identical to those in Case
T-326/02.

Action brought on 8 November 2002 by Metro-Goldwin-
Mayer Lion Corporation against the Office for Harmon-
ization in the Internal Market

(Case T-342/02)

(2003/C 19/72)

(Language of the case: English)

An action against the Office for Harmonization in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 8 November 2002 by Metro-
Goldwin-Mayer Lion Corporation, Santa Monica, California
(United States of America), represented by Fernand de Visscher,
Emmanuel Cornu, Eric De Gryse, Donatienne Moreau, avocats.
A further party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
was Moser Grupo Media, S.L., Santa Eulalia Del Rio (Baleares -
Spain).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— uphold the claim for annulment;

The applicant claims that the Court should:

5 September 2002;

— annul the Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of

(1)

(2)

Primarily, annul the Commission’s decision of 19 June
2002 (C(2002) 2158 final) concerning State aid provided
by the Netherlands for the activities of Netherlands
tugboats operating within seaports and on inland water-
ways of the Community;

In the alternative, annul Articles 2 and 3 of the contested
Commission decision, in which the Commission requires
the Netherlands Government inter alia to adopt all
measures necessary to recover the aid from recipients,
with the exception of that aid which was granted prior to
12 September 1990;

— confirm the decision of the Opposition Division of
19 February 2001 insofar as it upholds the Opposition
number B 47730 for all the contested goods and services
and rejects application for registration no 409664 in its
entirety on the basis of applicant’s national registrations
of the trademark ‘MGM’;

— annul the decision of the Opposition Division of 19 Feb-
ruary 2001 insofar as it does not admit as ground for
rejection applicant’s CTM no 141820 of the trademark
‘MGM’ or, in subsidiary order, insofar as it does not admit
as ground for rejection the earlier national trade mark
registrations in Austria, Greece and the United Kingdom;

(3) Order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceed-

ings.

— condemn the Office to the costs of the proceedings.

C 19/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2003

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Com-
munity trade mark:

Moser Grupo Media, S.L.

The Community trade
mark concerned:

The figurative trade mark ‘Moser
Grupo Media, s.l.’ for goods and
services in classes 9, 16, 38, 39
and 41 (application no 409664)

The applicant, Metro-Goldwin-

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

sign

Trade mark or
Several national rights and com-
asserted by way of oppo- munity trade mark application
no 141820 of the word mark
sition in the opposition
‘MGM’ for goods and services in
proceedings:
classes 9, 38 and 41

Decision of the Oppo-
sition Division:

Rejection of the community trade
mark application no 409664 of
Moser Grupo Media, disregarding
some of
the earlier rights and
community trade mark appli-
cation no 141820 by the applicant
in the present case for the word
mark ‘MGM’

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Rejection of the appeal by the
opponent, applicant in the pre-
sent case, as inadmissible

Grounds of claim:

— Infringement of Article 58 of
Regulation 40/94 (1)in so far
as the applicant is adversely
affected by the decision of
the Opposition Division.
According to the applicant,
it is still possible for Moser
Grupo Media to convert its
trade mark
community
application
other
countries with the advantage
of using the date of its Com-
munity trade mark appli-
cation. This would not have
been possible if
the trade
mark application had been
rejected on the grounds of
the applicant’s Community
trade mark application.

in

— Violation of Articles 42 and
8 of Regulation 40/94.
According to the applicant,
an opposition can be based
on an earlier community tra-
de mark application that is
not yet registered as a trade
mark.

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

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

Action brought on 15 November 2002 by Roland Schint-
gen against Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-343/02)

(2003/C 19/73)

(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 15 November 2002 by Roland
Schintgen, residing in Keispelt (Luxembourg), represented by
Lucas Vogel, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision adopted by the appointing authority
on 16 July 2002 rejecting the complaint lodged by the
applicant on 28 February 2002 requesting the annulment
of the elections to the local staff committee, the appoint-
ment of the elected members to the staff committee and
the refusal by the Commission to annul the aforemen-
tioned elections and declare that the local staff committee
in Luxembourg, formed following the said elections, was
not validly constituted;

— annul, in so far as necessary, the abovementioned elec-
tions to the local staff committee in Luxembourg, together
with the appointment of the elected members consequent
thereupon and annul the refusal by the Commission to
annul the elections and declare unlawful the composition
the local staff committee in Luxembourg which
of
resulted therefrom;

— order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings and
the expenses necessarily incurred for the purpose of the
proceedings,
in particular the travel and subsistence
expenses and the remuneration of lawyers.