Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 9 April 2003 in Case T-224/01: Durferrit GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Earlier word mark TUFFTRIDE — Application for Community word mark NU-TRIDE — Likelihood of confusion — Likelihood of association — Trade marks which are contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality — Article 7(1)(f) and Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Date: 2003-06-07
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, trade-mark law

7.6.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 135/27

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 9 April 2003

in Case T-155/01: Robert Walton v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Temporary staff — Dismissal for unsatisfactory perform-
ance of duties — Action for annulment and for compensation
for dismissal)

address for service in Luxembourg, v Office for Harmonisation
in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
(Agents: A. von Mühlendahl and O. Waelbroeck): Action
brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
Marks and Designs) of 6 July 2001 (Case R 864/1999-1),
relating to opposition proceedings between Durferrit GmbH
and Kolene Corporation, 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 9 April 2003, in which it:

(2003/C 135/41)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-155/01, Robert Walton, a former member of
the temporary staff of the Commission of the European
Communities, residing in Oxford (United Kingdom), represent-
ed by P. Harris, Barrister, v Commission of the European
Communities (Agent: J. Currall): Application principally for
annulment of the letter of 3 October 2000, whereby the
Commission terminated the applicant’s employment as a
member of the temporary staff, and for compensation for
breach of his contract of employment, the Court of First
Instance (Second Chamber), composed of: N.J. Forwood,
President,
J. Plingers,
J. Pirrung and A.W.H. Meij, Judges;
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
9 April 2003, in which it has ruled:

1.

2.

The application is dismissed.

The parties shall bear their own costs.

( 1) OJ C 275 of 29.09.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 9 April 2003

in Case T-224/01: Durferrit GmbH v Office for Harmonis-
ation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(OHIM) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Earlier
word mark TUFFTRIDE — Application for Community
word mark NU-TRIDE — Likelihood of confusion —
Likelihood of association — Trade marks which are contrary
to public policy or to accepted principles of morality —
Article 7(1)(f) and Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation
(EC) No 40/94)

(2003/C 135/42)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case T-224/01, Durferrit GmbH, established in Mannheim
(Germany), represented by P. Koch Moreno, lawyer, with an

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 3 of 5.1.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 3 April 2003

in Case T-114/02: Babyliss SA v Commission of the
European Communities (1)

(Competition — Concentrations — Regulation (EEC)
No 4064/89 — Action brought by a third party — Admissi-
bility — Phase one undertakings — Trade mark licence —
Amendments to undertakings — Time-limits — Financial
assistance provided by the State — Derisory trade-in price
— Serious doubts concerning the compatibility of the
concentration with the common market — Absence of
undertaking with regard to markets posing serious compe-
tition problems)

(2003/C 135/43)

(Language of the case: French)

In Case T-114/02: Babyliss SA, established in Montrouge
(France) represented by J.-P. Gunther, lawyer, supported by De
Longhi SpA, established in Trevisso (Italy), represented by
M. Merola, D. Domenicucci and I. van Schendel,
lawyers,
against Commission of the European Comunities (Agents:
V. Superti, K. Wiedner and F. Lelièvre), supported by SEB SA,
established in Écully (France), represented by D. Voillemot
and S. Hautbourg, lawyers — application for annulment of
Commission Decision D/228078 of 8 January 2002 not to
oppose the concentration between SEB and Moulinex and to