Case T-177/06: Action brought on 3 July 2006 — Ayuntamiento de Madrid and Madrid Calle 30 v Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2006-09-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU statistics, European Commission, European accounting system, Eurostat, action for annulment (EU), data transmission, loss

2.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/33

Action brought on 29 June 2006 — Coca-Cola Company v
OHIM — Azienda Agricola San Polo (MEZZOPANE)

Action brought on 3 July 2006 — Ayuntamiento de
Madrid and Madrid Calle 30 v Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities

(Case T-175/06)

(2006/C 212/59)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

(Case T-177/06)

(2006/C 212/60)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Coca-Cola Company (N.W Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A)
(represented by: E. Armijo Chavarri and A. Castán Pérez-
Gómez, lawyers)

Parties

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

Applicants: Ayuntamiento de Madrid and Madrid Calle 30
(Madrid) (represented by: J. L. Buendía Sierra and R. González-
Gallarza Granizo)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Azienda Agricola San Polo Exe S.r.l

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of

5 April 2006 in Case R-99/2005-1;

— order the Office to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant
Polo Exe S.r.l

for a Community trade mark: Azienda Agricola San

Form of order sought

— order the cancellation of the classification by the European
Commission (Eurostat) of Madrid Calle 30 in the ‘public
administration’ sector,
in accordance with the ‘European
System of Accounts’ (ESA 95) set out in Annex A of Regu-
lation (EC) No 2223/96 of the Council of 25 June 1996,
which is based on the accounts published by the Commis-
sion (Eurostat) on 24 April 2006 on the data for the year
2005 on government deficit and debt for the application of
the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure;

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark 'MEZZOPANE'
for goods in Class 33 — Application No 2 242 147.

— order the Commission of the European Communities to

pay the costs.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceed-
ings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word mark 'MEZZO' and
'MEZZOMIX' for goods in Class 32.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Application for registration
of the mark refused.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Opposition Division's decision
annulled.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 since the goods designated by the opposing marks
are similar, the opposing marks are visually and phonetically
similar and the marks at issue are capable of giving rise to a
likelihood of confusion in the course of trade.

Pleas in law and main arguments

This application seeks annulment of the classification by the
European Commission (Eurostat) of Madrid Calle 30 S.A. in the
‘public administration’ sector, in accordance with the ‘EURO-
PEAN SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTS — ESA 95’ (ESA 95) set out in
Annex A of Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on
the European system of national and regional accounts in the
Community (1). According to the applicants, that classification
is based on the accounts published by the Commission
(Eurostat) on 24 April 2006 on the data for the year 2005 on
government deficit and debt for the application of the Protocol
on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the EC Treaty.

The applicants submit that Madrid Calle 30 is a corporation
whose shares are held by the Ayuntamiento de Madrid and a
private consortium, formed of three construction and service
companies selected after a call
for tenders subject to strict
criteria in respect of market prices.

C 212/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.9.2006

In support of their forms of order the applicants allege:

— infringement of several of the ESA 95 rules on the classifi-
cation of institutional units in the ‘public administration’ or
‘non-financial corporation’ sectors.

— infringement of the general principles that administrative
acts must state the principles on which they are based and
that the person concerned must be given a hearing.

Pleas in law: The mark applied for is capable of being protected
as it has the necessary distinctive character within the meaning
of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 64 of Regulation
(EC) No 40/94 (1). Furthermore, the contested decision infringes
the principle of equal treatment.

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

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

(1) OJ 1996 L 310, p. 1.

Action brought on 7 July 2006 — Fränkischer Weinbau-
verband v OHIM (three-dimensional mark ‘Bocksbeutel’)

(Case T-180/06)

(2006/C 212/61)

Language of the case: German

Parties

(Würzburg,
Applicant:
Germany) (represented by N. Hetzelt and A. Weigand, lawyers)

Fränkischer Weinbauverband

e.V.

Action brought on 6 July 2006 — Italian Republic v
Commission

(Case T-181/06)

(2006/C 212/62)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant:
avvocato dello stato)

Italian Republic (represented by: Giacomo Aiello,

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

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

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade
Marks and Designs) of 25 April 2006 (Case No R 0479/
2004-1);

— order the defendant to publish Community trade mark No
002323301 in accordance with Article 40 of the Com-
munity trade mark regulation and;

— order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The three-dimensional collec-
tive mark ‘Bocksbeutel’ for goods and services in Classes 32, 33
and 42 (Registration No 2 323 301).

Decision of the Examiner: Partial rejection of the application.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejection of the appeal.

— Annul Commission Decision 2006/334/EC of 28 April
2006 (C (2006) 1702) in so far as it excludes from Com-
munity financing certain expenditure incurred by the Italian
the European
Republic under the Guarantee Section of
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and
order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Italian Republic has brought an action before the Court of
First Instance challenging Commission Decision C (2006) 1702
of 28 April 2006 in so far as it excludes from Community
financing certain expenditure incurred by the applicant under
the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
(EAGGF).

In support of its claims, the applicant alleges infringement and
misapplication of:

— Article 11(1)(c)(4), Article 13(2), Article 15(4)(a), Article
30(1) and (2), and Article 51 of Council Regulation (EC) No
2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation
of the market in fruit and vegetables (OJ 1996 L 297 of
2.11.1996, p. 19);