Case T-388/04: Action brought on 28 September 2004 by Habib Kachakil Amar against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2004-11-20
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), clothing, trade-mark law

20.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/29

That classification, based as the applicants believe it to be, on
an incorrect economic analysis of the situation, gives rise to
damage to the applicants, inasmuch as the introduction of the
derived prices brings in a rise in the costs of production for the
sugar businesses operating within Italy. In particular, according
to the applicants, when computing the domestic supply in
Italy, the Commission failed to take account of the quantities of
white sugar imported subject to zero duty from the Balkan
States, imports that appreciably alter the conditions on which
the common organisation of
the market operates, causing
major imbalances in that market, which are increased as a
result of the applying of regionalisation to the Italian market.

The applicants therefore consider that Article 1(d) of
the
contested regulation is at the same time defective in its grounds
and potentially contrary, in its effects, to the Community prin-
ciples underlying the Common Agricultural Policy and to the
rules governing the common organisation of the market in
sugar, and also to the principles of proportionality and equal
treatment.

If it should happen, which the applicants strongly contest, that
the Court of First Instance should be unwilling to uphold the
criticisms directed against the regulation at issue in the prin-
cipal head of claim, the applicants request, as a secondary
claim, that the Court should as an interlocutory matter declare
and inapplicable Article 2 of Regulation No
unlawful
1260/2001,
in that it permits the Commission not to take
account of the effect on trends in the market of imports not
subject to duty or to a quota for the purposes of the fixing of
the derived intervention price.

Action brought on 28 September 2004 by Habib Kachakil
Amar against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-388/04)

(2004/C 284/56)

(Language in which the application was submitted: Spanish)

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 28
September 2004 by Habib Kachakil Amar, represented by Juan
Carlos Heder, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— Annul the contested decision of the OHIM First Board of

Appeal of 20 July 2004 in Case R 175/2004-1, and

— Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Community trade mark
sought:

black

longitudinal

Figurative mark consisting of a
thick
line
ending in a triangle B application
No 3 235 157 for products
in
Class
footwear,
(Clothing,
headgear, in particular sports foot-
wear)

25

Examiner's decision:

as

Application rejected
falling
within the absolute grounds of
refusal provided for
in Article
7(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 on
the Community trade mark.

Decision of
of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board

Application dismissed.

Misapplication of the abovemen-
tioned regulation and breach of
the rights of the defence and of
the principle of the protection of
legitimate expectations

Action brought on 24 September 2004 by Salvatore
Gagliardi against the Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (O.H.I.M.)

(Case T-392/04)

(2004/C 284/57)

(Language in which the application was submitted: Italian)

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 24
September 2004 by Salvatore Gagliardi, proprietor of the one-
man business of the same name, represented by Alex Schmitt,
Prof. Paolo Biavati and Sandro Corona, lawyers.

The company Norma Lebensmittelfilaialbetrieb GmbH & Co.
KG was also a party to the proceedings before the Board of
Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision inter partes of the Fourth Appeal Board

of the O.H.I.M. (proceedings R 0154/2002-4), and

— pursuant to Article 87 of the Rules of Procedure, order the
unsuccessful parties (the O.H.I.M. in so far as it incurs liabi-
lity, for example, for being at fault on account of its having
gone beyond the limits of the action brought before it) to
pay the costs.