Case T-36/07: Action brought on 12 February 2007 — Zipcar v OHIM — Canary Islands Car (ZIPCAR)
Date: 2007-04-14
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), carriage of passengers, service, trade-mark law

C 82/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.4.2007

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 (1) given that there is a likelihood of association and a
likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

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

Community trade mark.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Violation of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as there was no likelihood of confusion and the
Board of Appeal failed to reach proper conclusions about both
the nature of the average consumer of the relevant services and
the nature of the relevant market.

Action brought on 12 February 2007 — Zipcar v OHIM —
Canary Islands Car (ZIPCAR)

(Case T-36/07)

(2007/C 82/94)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Action brought on 16 February 2007 — Mohamed El
Morabit v Council of the European Union

(Case T-37/07)

(2007/C 82/95)

Language of the case: Dutch

Applicant: Zipcar,
Inc.
Elmslie, Solicitor, and N. Saunders, Barrister)

(Cambridge, USA)

(represented by: M.

Parties

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

Applicant: Mohamed El Morabit
(represented by: U. Sarikaya, lawyer)

(Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Canary
Islands Car SL (Lanzarote, Spain)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal dated
30 November 2006 in its entirety and remit the application
to the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) to allow it to proceed;

— order that the Office pay the applicant's costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘ZIPCAR’ for
goods and services in classes 9, 39 and 42 — application
No 3 139 375

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
Canary Islands Car SL

— Annul the contested decision of the Council.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant contests the Council decision placing him on the
list of persons, groups and entities that are subject to the restric-
tive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/
2001 of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive measures
directed against certain persons and entities with a view to
combating terrorism (1).

The applicant submits that, although he has been found guilty
by a court of participating in a criminal organisation with a
terrorist aim, he has appealed against the judgment. He submits
that there is a real chance that he will be acquitted on appeal.
The Council's decision is therefore premature.

Mark or sign cited: The national word mark ‘CICAR’ for services
in class 39

(1) OJ 2001 L 344, p. 70.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in relation
to the contested services in class 39