Case T-290/04: Action brought on 21 July 2004 by Miguel Teixeira Gaspar, Pedro Paixão Telhada, Ricardo Jorge da Silva Seara Pinto de Amorim and Fernando Miguel Santos Ribeiro against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-10-23
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), music, trade-mark law

C 262/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.10.2004

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the defendant notified to the applicant
on 7 October 2003 rejecting her complaint about
the
promotion points awarded to her
in the 1999/2000
promotion procedure and in the 2001 promotion proce-
dure;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

On 5 February 2002, the applicant, an official of the Court of
Justice, was informed of the decision to award her no promo-
tion points for the years 1999 and 2000. On 16 January 2003,
the applicant was also informed that she had been awarded one
promotion point
in the 2001 promotion procedure. She
complained about the latter decision and subsequently made
another complaint, concerning the award of no points for the
years 1999 and 2000. Her complaint was rejected as out of
time for the years 1999 and 2000 and as unfounded as regards
the year 2001.

this action,

the applicant submits that

In support of
the
contested award of points is in breach of the decision of the
Court of 18 October 2000 introducing that system, on the
ground that it was not made on the basis of her staff reports,
as the points awarded were wholly inconsistent with those
reports. As regards the rejection, on the ground that it was out
of time, of her complaint about the award of no points for
1999 and 2000, the applicant submits that the delay of almost
two years in communicating her staff report for 1999/2000 to
her prevented her from being aware of the errors in the award
of points for that promotions procedure. According to the
the promotion procedure
applicant,
concerned would not in any way be called into question if she
were permitted to contest the failure to award her any points
for those two years, given that the number of points obtained
does not automatically guarantee a promotion.

the legal certainty of

Action brought on 21 July 2004 by Miguel Teixeira
Gaspar, Pedro Paixão Telhada, Ricardo Jorge da Silva Seara
Pinto de Amorim and Fernando Miguel Santos Ribeiro
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
against
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-290/04)

(2004/C 262/69)

Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 21
July 2004 by Miguel Teixeira Gaspar, Pedro Paixão Telhada,
Ricardo Jorge da Silva Seara Pinto de Amorim and Fernando
Miguel Santos Ribeiro, resident in Parede and Brandoa, repre-
sented by Ana Clara Santos and Inês Alves Guerra, lawyers.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM
of 17 March 2004 in Case R 0682/2001-4, notified to the
applicants on 18 May 2004.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

João Pedro Lamúrias Escoval.

Community trade mark
sought:

Figurative mark ‘MOONSPELL’ —
Application No.
for
goods and services in class 41
(musical band).

483438

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

The applicants.

Mark or sign cited in
opposition.

The word mark ‘MOONSPELL’
used by the applicants for goods
and services in class 41 (musical
band).

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Opposition dismissed.

Decision of
of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board

Appeal dismissed.

Infringement of Article 8(1), (2)(c)
and (4) and Articles 75 and 76 of
Regulation No 40/94 (1). Widely-
known mark used by the appli-
cants at the time of the application
for registration in question. Negli-
gent assessment of
the evidence
submitted by the applicants.

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

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

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
(Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Market