Case T-389/06: Action brought on 20 December 2006 — Inter-IKEA v OHIM (representation of a pallet)
Date: 2007-01-27
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), furniture industry, trade-mark law

27.1.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 20/35

Alternatively, the applicant submits that the Commission failed
to comply with the fining guidelines, its own consistent practice
and the principles of non-discrimination and equality of treat-
ment in calculating the fine for which the applicant is held
liable by reference to the individual circumstances of a different
undertaking, Tomkins. The applicant further alleges that the
Commission committed an error in calculating the fine.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the
implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81
and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1).

(2) Commission Notice of 14 January 1998 entitled ‘Guidelines on the
method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 15(2) of Regu-
lation No 17 and Article 65(5) of the ECSC Treaty’ (OJ 1998 C 9,
p. 3).

Action brought on 20 December 2006 — Inter-
IKEA v OHIM (representation of a pallet)

(Case T-388/06)

(2007/C 20/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant:
sented by: J. Gulliksson, lawyer)

Inter-IKEA Systems BV (Delft, Netherlands)

(repre-

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

Form of order sought

Action brought on 20 December 2006 — Inter-
IKEA v OHIM (representation of a pallet)

— Annul the decision of

the First Board of Appeal of 26

September 2006 in Case R 354/2006-1;

(Case T-387/06)

(2007/C 20/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant:
sented by: J. Gulliksson, lawyer)

Inter-IKEA Systems BV (Delft, Netherlands)

(repre-

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

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of

the First Board of Appeal of 26

September 2006 in Case R 353/2006-1;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a
pallet consisting of an elongated rectangular platform or base
and an equally elongated flange, ornamented with square holes,
which are both at a 90 degree angle to each other, for goods
and services in classes 6, 7, 16, 20, 35, 39 et 42 — application
No 4 073 763

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the trade mark is sufficiently distinctive to be regis-
tered.

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a
pallet consisting of an elongated rectangular platform or base
and an equally elongated flange, ornamented with round holes,
which are both at a 90 degree angle to each other, for goods
and services in classes 6, 7, 16, 20, 35, 39 et 42 — application
No 4 073 731

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the trade mark is sufficiently distinctive to be regis-
tered.

Action brought on 20 December 2006 — Inter-
IKEA v OHIM (representation of a pallet)

(Case T-389/06)

(2007/C 20/54)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant:
sented by: J. Gulliksson, lawyer)

Inter-IKEA Systems BV (Delft, Netherlands)

(repre-

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

C 20/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

27.1.2007

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of

the First Board of Appeal of 26

September 2006 in Case R 355/2006-1;

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the trade mark is sufficiently distinctive to be regis-
tered.

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a
pallet consisting of an elongated rectangular platform or base
and an equally elongated flange, ornamented with triangle
holes, which are both at a 90 degree angle to each other, for
goods and services in classes 6, 7, 16, 20, 35, 39 et 42 —
application No 4 073 748

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Action brought on 18 December 2006 — Makhteshim
Agan Holding and others v Commission

(Case T-393/06)

(2007/C 20/56)

Language of the case: English

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the trade mark is sufficiently distinctive to be regis-
tered.

Parties

Applicants: Makhteshim Agan Holding BV (Amsterdam, The
Nederlands), Makhteshim Agan Italia Srl (Bergamo, Italy) and
Magan Italia Srl (Bergamo, Italy) (represented by: C. Mereu and
K. Van Maldegem, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Action brought on 20 December 2006 — Inter-
IKEA v OHIM (representation of a pallet)

Form of order sought

(Case T-390/06)

(2007/C 20/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

— Annulment of Commission Decision D/531125, of 12

October 2006;

— order the defendant to comply with its obligations under
Community law and review and use all available data,
including human data, to ensure the inclusion of azinphos-
methyl in Annex I to the PPPD;

— order the defendant to pay all costs and expenses in these

Applicant:
sented by: J. Gulliksson, lawyer)

Inter-IKEA Systems BV (Delft, Netherlands)

(repre-

proceedings.

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

Pleas in law and main arguments

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of

the First Board of Appeal of 26

September 2006 in Case R 356/2006-1;

— order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing a
pallet consisting of an elongated rectangular platform or base
and an equally elongated flange, both ornamented with round
holes, which are both at a 90 degree angle to each other, for
goods and services in classes 6, 7, 16, 20, 35, 39 et 42 —
application No 4 073 722

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

By means of their application, the applicants seek annulment of
Commission Decision D/531125 set forth in a letter of 12
October 2006, addressed to the agency within the rapporteur
Member State responsible for the review of the active substance
azinphos-methyl under the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC
concerning the placing of plants protection products on the
market (hereinafter, the ‘PPPD’) (1), in which the defendant states
it will not take a decision on the approval and inclusion of the
active substance concerned in Annex I of the said directive and
further indicates that in the absence of approval at Community
level by the date laid down in Article 8, paragraph 2, of the
PPPD, there would no longer be any legal basis for keeping the
substance on the market.

The applicants claim that the contested decision amounts to a
de facto and de jure ban of azinphos-methyl, insofar as it unam-
biguously states that no further decision on the inclusion of the
substance in Annex I of the PPPD will be taken and in that it
aims to achieve an azinphos-methyl marketing ban through the
defendant's inactivity until the expiration of the set time-limit
for approval.