Case T-286/03: Action brought on 15 August 2003 by The Gillette Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Date: 2003-10-18
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), toiletries, trade-mark law

C 251/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

18.10.2003

Regulations) and breach of the principle of equality of treat-
ment and non-discrimination.

Action brought on 18 August 2003 by Agraz SA and
110 others against the Commission of the European
Communities

(Case T-285/03)

(2003/C 251/34)

(Language of the case: French)

the Commission of

the European
An action against
Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance
of the European Communities on 18 August 2003 by the
company Agraz SA and 110 other companies, represented
by J.-L. da Cruz Vilaça, R. Oliveira, M.-J. Melícias and
D. Choussy, laywers.

for

the marketing

year 2000/2001,

the
Specifically,
Commission took as its basis for calculating production aid
the export prices of tomatoes from the United States, Israel
and Turkey. It follows that the defendant did not take into
account the export prices of China, although in 1999 it was
the world's second largest producer of tomatoes. That basis for
calculation significantly reduced production aid.

their claims,

In support of
the
conditions in the Bergadem case-law are fulfilled in the present
case.

the applicants argue that

that

The applicants claim that that omission infringes the relevant
basic regulation (2),
the regulation confers rights on
individuals and that the powers of the Commission when
Regulation No 1519/2000 was adopted were extremely lim-
ited, consisting merely in identifying the reference countries
for the purposes of calculating the amount of the aid.

Finally,
the Commission infringed the principles of good
administration and legitimate expectations by failing to make
the effort needed to learn the Chinese prices and by refusing,
once it was notified of those prices, to amend the regulation.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

(1) OJ L 174 of 13.7.2000, p. 29.
(2) OJ L 297 of 21.11.1996, p. 29.

— order the defendant to pay each applicant company the
balance of the production aid together with interest at a
rate fixed by the Court of First Instance as from 12 July
2000 (or, in the alternative, as from 13 July 2000 or,
further in the alternative, as from 16 July 2000) and until
the actual day of payment;

Action brought on 15 August 2003 by The Gillette
Company against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

— order the Commission to pay the costs, including those

incurred by the applicants.

(Case T-286/03)

(2003/C 251/35)

Pleas in law and main arguments

(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2) of
the Rules of Procedure — language in which the application was
submitted: German)

The present application seeks recognition of the extra-contrac-
tual liability of the Community arising from the damage alleg-
edly suffered by the applicants as the result of the method used
to calculate the amount of production aid for processed
tomato products for the marketing year 2000/2001 under
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1519/2000 of 12 July
2000 setting for the 2000/01 marketing year the minimum
price and the amount of production aid for processed tomato
products (1).

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
the European Communities on
Court of First Instance of
15 August 2003 by The Gillette Company, Boston (USA),
represented by L. Kouker,
lawyer. Wilkinson Sword GmbH,
Solingen (Germany), was also a party to the proceedings
before the Board of Appeal.

18.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/19

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
(Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 April 2003 in Case
No R 221/2002-4;

Action brought on 13 August 2003 by TeleTech Holdings,
Inc. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-288/03)

(2003/C 251/36)

— order the defendant Office to pay the costs of the pro-

(Language of the case: Spanish)

Wilkinson Sword GmbH

Pleas in law and main arguments

ceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Community trade mark
sought:

Proprietor of mark or
sign cited in the opposi-
tion proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

The applicant

Figurative mark ‘XTREME RIGHT
GUARD SPORT’
in respect of
goods in Class 3 (non-medicated
preparations for use in the bath
anti-perspirants;
or
in
deodorants;
3) — application
Class
No 1486745

included

shower;

all

The German figurative marks
‘WILKINSON SWORD EXTREME’
(Nos 399 23 715 and 399 45 175)
in respect of goods in Class 3
(shaving cosmetics)

Decision
Opposition Division:

of

the

Rejection of the opposition

Decision of the Board of
Appeal:

Annulment of the decision of the
Opposition Division and refusal
of the applicant's application for
registration

Pleas in law:

— Infringement of Article 8(1)
(EC)

Regulation

of

(b)
No 40/94;

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
13 August 2003 by TeleTech Holdings, Inc., established in
Denver, Colorado, (USA), represented by E. Armijo Chávarri
and A. Castán Pérez-Gómez, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM
of 28 May 2003 in Case R-412/2000-1 and, subject to
the appropriate procedural steps, give judgment uphold-
ing either the applicant's principal claim or its alternative
claim.

Community trade mark
in respect of which
declaration of invalidity
sought:

Word mark ‘TELETECH GLOBAL
VENTURES’ — Registered trade
mark No 134.908, for products
in Classes 35 and 38.

Owner of
the Com-
munity trade mark in
respect
which
of
declaration of invalidity
sought:

Person applying for a
declaration of invalidity:

The applicant.

Teletech International S.A. (owner
of
the national word mark
‘TELETECH INTERNATIONAL’),
in respect of certain goods within
Class 35 (business management
for technical services, customer
relations and call centres) and
Class 38 (telecommunications
services).

Application upheld in part

Appeal upheld, solely in so far as
the contested decision declared
the Community mark in issue
‘business
invalid in respect of
management assistance services
consisting of
facilities manage-
ment and site selection services’.

— No likelihood of confusion;

— No similarity between the

opposing marks.

Decision
Cancellation Division:

of

the

Decision of the Board of
Appeal: