Case T-395/05: Action lodged on  31 October 2005  — Multikauf v OHIM
Date: 2006-02-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

C 48/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

25.2.2006

Order of the Court of First Instance of 23 November 2005
— Bustec Ireland v OHIM

Forms of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Case T-218/05) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition — Withdrawal of the
opposition — No need to adjudicate)

(2006/C 48/66)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Bustec Ireland (Shanon, County Clare, Ireland) (repre-
sented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and A. Castán Pérez-Gómez,
lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. García Murillo,
Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Mustek, S.L. (Barcelona, Spain)

Action

brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of
OHIM of 22 March 2005 (Case R 1125/2004-2) relating to
opposition proceedings brought against the registration of the
Community trade mark BUSTEC

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares it no longer necessary to give judgment on the action;

2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 182 of 23.7.2005.

Action lodged on 31 October 2005 — Multikauf v OHIM

(Case T-395/05)

(2006/C 48/67)

Language of the case: German

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade
Marks and Designs) of 20 June 2005 — served on the
applicant's agent by DHL on 31 August 2005 — in appeal
proceedings R 895/2004-1

— dismiss the objection raised by the third party through its
agent on 18 September 2001 to registration of the Com-
munity trade mark 1841121 ‘webmulti’.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark sought: The word mark ‘webmulti’ for
goods and services in Classes 3, 7, 8, 9, 16, 20, 21, 25 and 30
— Registration application No 1 841 121

Proprietor of mark or sign cited in opposition proceedings: Demo
Holding S.A.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The Community, national and
international word and figurative marks ‘WEB’ for goods in
Classes 3, 9 and 25

Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was allowed
and the registration in respect of certain goods referred to in
the application was refused

Decision of
dismissed

the Board of Appeal: The applicant's appeal was

Pleas in law: The opposing marks were not used for some of the
goods.

Action brought on 14 November 2005 — Eerola v
Commission

(Case T-410/05)

(2006/C 48/68)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Iiro Eerola (Brussels, Belgium)
Applicant:
Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

(represented by: S.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

Applicant: Multikauf Warenhandelsgesellschaft mBH (Krailling,
Germany) (represented by: M. Bahmann, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Demo
Holding S.A. (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the decision of the Commission refusing to grant to
the applicant the expatriation allowance provided for in
Article 4(1) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.