Case T-315/06: Action brought on 17 November 2006 — Ercros v OHIM — Degussa (TAI CROS)
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

C 326/68

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Moreover, the applicant alleges that the Community institutions
violated Article 15(2) of the Basic Regulation (2) by failing to
consult the Advisory Committee on time on the exclusion of
three-door side-by-side refrigerators from the scope of
the
product concerned.

Finally, the applicant claims that the Community institutions
violated the Basic Regulation in their approach to defining the
product scope on the basis of physical characteristics without
regard to consumer perception.

(1) OJ 2006 L 236, p. 11.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of
the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish word marks ‘CROS’,
Spanish word mark ‘SOCIEDAD ANONIMA CROS’, Spanish
figurative marks ‘CROS’ and Spanish word mark ‘ERCROS’ for
goods in Class 1.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition.

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

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 (1), since there is a likelihood of confusion between
the two opposing marks.

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

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

Action brought on 17 November 2006 — Ercros v OHIM
— Degussa (TAI CROS)

(Case T-315/06)

(2006/C 326/142)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Action brought on 9 November 2006 — Commission v
Premium

(Case T-316/06)

(2006/C 326/143)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Ercros, SA (Barcelona, Spain)
Thierie, lawyer)

(represented by: R.

Parties

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Degussa AG (Düsseldorf, Germany)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— ‘purely and simply’ alter the contested decision (decision of
the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 September 2006
in appeal proceedings R 29/2006-1);

— grant the opposition and reject the application for figurative

mark No 2 768 851 ‘TAICROS’;

— order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Degussa AG.

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘TAI CROS’
for goods in Class 1 (Application No 2 768 851).

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

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (Brussels,
Belgium) (represented by: E. Montaguti, Agent, assisted by J.-L.
Fagnart and F. Longfils, lawyers)

Defendant: Premium SA

Form of order sought

— declare the application to be admissible and well founded,

and, in consequence:

— order Premium SA to pay

amount of
EUR 88 594,493, representing EUR 57 605,74 in respect of
the contract ISAR A 2052 and EUR 30 988,74 in respect of
the contract KAVAS-2 A2019;

a principal

— order Premium SA to pay the default interest due on the
amount of EUR 57 605,74 for the ISAR contract (at the
rate specified in the provisions of French law applicable to
the contract);

— order Premium SA to pay the default interest due on the
principal amount of EUR 30 988,74 for
the KAVAS-2
contract (at the rate specified in the provisions of Danish
law applicable to the contract);

— order Premium SA to pay the costs.