Case T-468/04: Action brought on 19 November 2004 by Kenzo Takada against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
Date: 2005-03-05
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), clothing industry, trade-mark law

5.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/27

In support of its application for annulment of that decision the
applicant claims first of all that the Commission violated the
principle of non-discrimination and of free competition. The
applicant considers that the Commission's decision to impose a
two month familiarisation period unfavourably discriminated
in favour of
for whom the familiarisation
period was obviously not necessary. In the same context the
applicant also contends that delivery of information to the
tenderers regarding the software application subject to the call
for tenders was insufficient whilst of course the incumbent had
unlimited access to such information.

the incumbent,

The applicant further submits that the Commission violated the
Financial Regulation (2) as well as Directive 92/50 (3) by using
evaluation criteria that were not
for
tenders, namely the size of the applicant's proposed team,
which was considered excessive by the Commission, and the
average number of years of experience of the applicant's team,
which the Commission considered was lower than that of the
team proposed by the successful tenderer.

included in the call

Action brought on 19 November 2004 by Kenzo Takada
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
against
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

(Case T-468/04)

(2005/C 57/46)

(Language in which the application was lodged: French)

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
19 November 2004 by Kenzo Takada, established in Paris,
represented by Fernand de Visscher, Eric de Gryse and Donati-
enne Moreau, lawyers.

Kenzo SA was also a party to the proceedings before the First
Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision delivered on 14 September 2004 by the

First Board of Appeal in case R 643/2003-1;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

that

further

applicant

the Commission
considers
The
committed manifest errors of appreciation in its evaluation of
the applicant's tender and in particular in its assessments of the
expertise of its proposed team and of the applicant's financial
offer where, according to the applicant, the Commission mista-
kenly assumed that all sixteen persons proposed by the appli-
cant would be working in parallel for the whole of the project.

The applicant also invokes a violation, by the Commission, of
its obligation, under Article 253 EC, to state reasons and a
failure to provide pertinent information requested by the appli-
cant on the grounds for the rejection of its bid. The applicant
also submits that the Commission violated the principle of
good administration and diligence by acting with significant
delay and by not offering adequate answers to the applicant's
requests for information prior to the submission of the bids.

(1) OJ 2004/S 73 – 061407
(2) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002
on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the
European Communities, OJ L 248, 16/09/2002, p.1

(3) Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coor-
dination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, OJ
L 209, 24/07/1992, p. 1

Applicant
munity trade mark:

for

Com-

Community trade mark
concerned:

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

Mark or sign cited in
opposition:

Kenzo Takada

mark

word

The
'KENZO
TAKADA' for goods and services
in Classes 3, 25 and 42 (Bleaching
preparations and other substances
for laundry use; clothing; services
for providing food and drink and
temporary accommodation, …) –
Application No 2008084

Kenzo SA

for

goods

Community, national and interna-
tional word and figurative marks
'KENZO'
and
the
services in Classes 3, 9, 25 and 42
(Bleaching preparations and other
substances
use;
providing
clothing;
temporary accommodation,
food
and drink, …)

for
services

laundry

Decision of the Opposi-
tion Division:

Application for Community trade
mark rejected.

Decision of
of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

the Board

Appeal dismissed

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of
Council Regulation No 40/94