Case T-462/05: Action brought on  30 December 2005  — Toyoda Koki Kabushiki Kaisha/OHIM
Date: 2006-03-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

25.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/27

Mark or sign cited: The national word mark ‘FLEX’ for goods in
classes 3 and 34

Decision of
entirety

the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in its

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 15 and 43(2) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 as the evidence filed by Revlon (Suisse)
S.A. cannot be considered valid proof of genuine use of the
word mark ‘FLEX’ during the relevant period, neither in the UK
nor in France

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation as there is no
similarity between the conflicting trade marks and consequently
no likelihood of confusion.

Action brought on 30 December 2005 — Toyoda Koki
Kabushiki Kaisha/OHIM

(Case T-462/05)

(2006/C 74/51)

Language of the case:English

Parties

Applicant: Toyoda Koki Kabushiki Kaisha (Aichi-Ken,
[represented by: J. F. Wachinger, lawyer]

Japan)

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

Form of order sought

Internal Market of 14 September 2005,
in Case R
1157/2004-1 to be void, to remand the case to the Board
of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market for reconsideration, and for the issuance of a new
decision,

— impose the costs of the proceedings on the defendant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘IFS’ for goods
in class 12 — application No 3 157 492

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application in respect of
all the designated goods

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Council Regu-
lation No 40/94 because of amongst others a wrongful defini-
tion of the relevant public and an erroneous assumption of
descriptive meaning.

Action brought on 12 January 2006 — Republic of Poland
v Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-4/06)

(2006/C 74/52)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by: Jarosław Pietras,
Agent of the Government)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

— Declare the decision taken by the First Board of Appeal of
the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 14
September 2005, in Case R 1157/2004-1 to be void and to
allow the registration of the word mark application No.
003157492 ‘IFS’ for the goods ‘steering and power steering,
both for vehicles and parts therefor, excluding independent
front suspension’ in the international class 12, referring to
the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classifica-
tion of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registra-
tion of Marks,

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EC) No
1686/2005 of 14 October 2005 setting the production
levies and the coefficient for the additional levy in the sugar
sector for the 2004/05 marketing year (OJ 2005 L 271 of
15.10.2005, p. 12) to be invalid;

— or, in the alternative, declare the decision taken by the First
Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs of the proceedings.