Case T-260/06: Action brought on 15 September 2006 — Arktouros v Commission
Date: 2006-11-18
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, Epirus, European Commission, action for annulment (EU), environmental protection, national park, redemption

C 281/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

18.11.2006

Form of order sought

Action brought on 15 September 2006 — Arktouros v
Commission

— annul the contested decision R 802/2004-2 of 28 June

2006 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM;

— reject application No 1 737 121 for registration of

the
word mark ‘BUD’ to designate services in Classes 35, 38, 41
and 42;

(Case T-260/06)

(2006/C 281/71)

Language of the case: Greek

— send the decision of the Court of First Instance to OHIM;

— order Anheuser-Busch to pay all the costs and expenses.

Parties

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Anheuser-Busch, Incor-
porated

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘BUD’ for services
in Classes 35, 38, 41 and 42 — Application No 1 737 121

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Protected designation of origin
‘BUD’ to designate beer

Applicant: Arktouros
the Protection and
(Association for
Management of the Natural Environment and Wildlife) (Thessa-
loniki, Greece)
and
N. Keramidas, lawyers)

by: N. Korogiannakis

(represented

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— annul Commission Decision C (2006)3181 final of 7 July
applicant on 10 July 2006,
2006, notified to the
concerning the ending of
the programme ‘Conservation
actions in the Northern Pindos National Park’ — Ellas —
LIFE03 NAT/GR/000089 and relating to the reimbursement
of assistance amounting to EUR 264 684,00 together with
default interest amounting to EUR 4 659,53;

— exclude a sum amounting to EUR 55 658,28 from the sum
to be repaid, in respect of eligible expenditure incurred in
connection with the programme;

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 62(1) of Regulation No
40/94 (1) and Article 20 of
implementing Regulation No
2868/95 (2) in that the Board of Appeal is not competent to
rule on the validity of the designation of origin invoked by the
applicant in the context of its opposition. It further submits
that
the sign ‘BUD’ constitutes a designation of origin,
protected in both France and Austria. The applicant also
invokes misapplication of Article 8(4) of Regulation No 40/94
in that, in its view, the designation of origin ‘BUD’ is indeed a
sign used in the course of trade.

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

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

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995
implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Com-
munity trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).

that

first,

The applicant submits,
the infringement by the
Commission of a provision contained in the LIFE Standard
Administrative Provisions constitutes an infringement of a rule
of law under Article 230 EC, rendering Commission Decision C
(2006)3181 final invalid.

Second, the applicant submits that the Commission made a
material error of assessment regarding the applicant's ability to
complete the programme despite the departure of two of its
members, an error which justifies annulment of the Commis-
sion decision concerning termination of the agreement and
recovery of the assistance granted.

In the alternative, the applicant seeks the exclusion of the sum
of EUR 55 658,28 from the sum to be repaid, in respect of
eligible
the
programme.

connection with

expenditure

incurred

in