Case T-234/06: Action brought on 4 September 2006 — Torresan v OHIM — Klosterbrauerei Weissenohe (CANNABIS)
Date: 2006-10-28
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), alcoholic beverage, beer, trade-mark law

28.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/23

In support of its claims the applicant puts forward that, in the
framework of the said tendering procedure, DG TAXUD failed
to respect the procedural requirements set out in the Financial
resulting in
Implementing Rules,
Regulation and its
unequal treatment of tenderers and violation of principles of
transparency
administration. Moreover, DG
TAXUD's decision allegedly contained manifest errors of assess-
ment and according to the applicant, by far exceeded the
discretion that European Institutions dispose of when evalu-
ating tenders.

sound

thus

and

Action brought on 26 August 2006 — Casa Editorial El
Tiempo v OHIM –Instituto Nacional de Meteorología (EL
TIEMPO)

(Case T-233/06)

(2006/C 261/43)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Class 38 (No 2217494,
and TELETIEMPO INSTITUTO
NACIONAL DE METEOROLOGÍA for services in Classes 35
(No 2217493) and 41 (No 2217492)

Decision of
refusal of the application for a Community trade mark

the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld and

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejection of the opposition in
respect of the following services: ‘advertising; business manage-
ment; business administration; office functions’ (Class 35) and
‘entertainment; sporting and cultural activities’ (Class 41)

Pleas in law: Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 on the Community trade mark

Action brought on 4 September 2006 — Torresan v
OHIM — Klosterbrauerei Weissenohe (CANNABIS)

(Case T-234/06)

(2006/C 261/44)

Parties

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Applicant: Casa Editorial El Tiempo SA (Bogotá, Colombia)
(represented by: A. Fernández Lerroux, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Instituto Nacional de Meteorología

Form of order sought

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

of 22 June 2006 in Case R-760/2005-4;

— order the defendant and the other party before the Board of

Appeal to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Casa Editorial El Tiempo
SA

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark EL TIEMPO (appli-
cation No 1685056) for goods and services in Classes 16, 35,
38 and 41

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
Instituto Nacional de Meteorología

sign cited in opposition: National word marks EL
Mark or
TIEMPO for publications (unregistered, but well-known), TELE-
TIEMPO for goods in Class 16 (No 1902923) and services in

Parties

Applicant: Giampietro Torresan (Schonenfels, Switzerland)
(represented by: Gianluca Recher, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Klosterbrauerei Weissenohe GmbH & Co. KG

Form of order sought

— annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 29
June 2006 in proceedings R 517/2005-2, notified by fax of
5 July 2006, and confirm the registration of the Com-
munity trade mark CANNABIS for Classes 32 and 33;

— in any case, order the costs of all of the proceedings to be
including those of the previous two appeals

reimbursed,
before OHIM.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of
invalidity has been sought: Word mark ‘CANNABIS’ (application
for goods and services in
for registration No 1.073.349),
Classes 32, 33 and 42.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant.

C 261/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.10.2006

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Klosterbrauerei Weisse-
nohe GmbH & Co. KG.

jurisdiction to hear disputes arising from the Obnova Contract
lies with the competent court in Brussels.

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: The applicant for
the declaration of invalidity does not claim any trade mark
right. The declaration of invalidity is applied for in respect of
goods in Classes 32 (beer) and 33 (wine, spirits, liqueurs, spark-
ling wine, champagne).

The applicant further claims that the defendant infringed essen-
tial procedural rules. In particular, the applicant's right to a fair
hearing was not granted and the obligation to state reasons
under Article 253 EC was infringed. In this connection the
applicant criticises also the properly to establish the facts.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Application for declaration
of invalidity partially granted, annulment of the registration of
the Community trade mark as regards the products claimed in
Classes 32 and 33.

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

Pleas in law: Infringement and misapplication of Article 7(1)(c)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark,
and contradiction in the grounds of the contested decision.

the applicant alleges that

Finally,
the defendant abused its
discretion by seeking repayment of the whole amount agreed
under the Obnova Contract, despite the fact that the terms of
the contract were properly fulfilled and the individual projects
properly implemented.

Action brought on 30 August 2006 — Austrian Relief
Program v Commission

(Case T-235/06)

(2006/C 261/45)

Language of the case: German

Action brought on 1 September 2006 — Landtag
Schleswig-Holstein v Commission

(Case T-236/06)

(2006/C 261/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Landtag Schleswig-Holstein (Kiel, Germany)
sented by: S.R. Laskowski and J. Caspar)

(repre-

Parties

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Applicant: Austrian Relief Program– Verein für Not- und Katas-
trophenhilfe (Innsbruck, Austria) (represented by: C. Leyroutz,
lawyer)

Form of order sought

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— annul Debit Note No 3 240 802 998 of 4 May 2006; and

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

— suspend the proceedings, in so far as the European Court of
Justice has not yet ruled on the dispute pending before it in
the same case.

In so far as the European Court of Justice declares that it
has no jurisdiction and refers the case back to the Court of
First Instance pursuant to Article 54 of the Statute of the
Court of Justice;

— annul the Commission decisions of 10 March 2006 and 23

June 2006; and

Pleas in law and main arguments

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

The applicant was selected by the Commission to carry out,
within framework of the Obnova programme financed by the
the
European Union, a project
contract signed on 2 April 1998 (‘the Obnova Contract’). By
letter of 4 May 2006 the Commission requested the applicant
to repay the whole amount agreed under that contract. By the
present action, the applicant challenges this decision.

in Serbia on the basis of

The applicant alleges, first of all, that the Commission was not
competent to adopt the contested decision, on the ground that

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the contested decision, the Commission refused the appli-
cant's request for access to document SEK (2005) 420 on the
basis of the second indent of Article 4(2) of the transparency
regulation (1). This document contains a legal analysis of the
Community's competence in the field of
the retention of
personal data by operators of electronic communications
networks.