Case C-196/06 P: Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 March 2007 — Alecansan SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), CompUSA Management Co (Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Application for registration of a figurative mark — Opposition of the proprietor of an earlier national figurative mark — Likelihood of confusion — None — No similarity between the goods and services covered by the conflicting trade marks)
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, General Court (EU), action for annulment (EU), computer equipment, trade-mark law

C 96/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

Operative part of the judgment

1. National legislation which prohibits the pursuit of the activities of
collecting, taking, booking and forwarding offers of bets, in particu-
lar bets on sporting events, without a licence or a police authorisa-
tion issued by the Member State concerned, constitutes a restriction
on the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services,
provided for in Articles 43 EC and 49 EC respectively.

2. It is for the national courts to determine whether,

in so far as
national
legislation limits the number of operators active in the
betting and gaming sector, it genuinely contributes to the objective
of preventing the exploitation of activities in that sector for criminal
or fraudulent purposes.

3. Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding
national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings,
which excludes — and, moreover, continues to exclude — from the
betting and gaming sector operators in the form of companies
whose shares are quoted on the regulated markets.

4. Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding
national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings,
which imposes a criminal penalty on persons such as the defendants
in the main proceedings for pursuing the organised activity of
collecting bets without a licence or a police authorisation as required
under the national legislation, where those persons were unable to
in
obtain licences or authorisations because that Member State,
breach of Community law, refused to grant licences or authorisa-
tions to such persons.

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the
Internal Market
(represented by:
(Trade Marks and Designs)
D. Botis, Agent), CompUSA Management Co

Re:

the national

Appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First
Chamber) of 7 February 2006 in Case T-202/03 Alecansan v
OHIM by which the Court of First Instance dismissed an action
brought by the proprietor of
figurative mark
‘COMP USA’ in respect of goods in Class 39 for annulment of
Decision R 711/2002-1 of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM
of 24 March 2003 dismissing the appeal against the decision of
the Opposition Division rejecting the opposition lodged against
the application for registration of
the figurative Community
trade mark ‘COMP USA’ in respect of goods in Classes 9 and 37
— Similarity
between the marks — Infringement of
Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of
20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994
L 11, p. 1)

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Alecansan SL shall bear the costs.

(1) OJ C 165, 15.7.2006.

(1) OJ C 190, 12.8.2006.

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 9 March 2007 —
Alecansan SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
CompUSA
Market

and Designs),

(Trade Marks

Management Co

(Case C-196/06 P) (1)

(Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Article 8(1)(b) — Application for registration of
a figurative mark — Opposition of the proprietor of an earlier
national figurative mark — Likelihood of confusion — None
— No similarity between the goods and services covered by
the conflicting trade marks)

Order of the Court of 8 March 2007 — Guido Strack v
Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-237/06 P) (1)

(Appeals — Staff cases — Decision to close an OLAF investi-
gation — Allegations of fraud made by an official — Locus
standi of the official)

(2007/C 96/43)

Language of the case: Italian

(2007/C 96/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Alecansan SL (represented by: P. Merino Baylos and
A. Velázquez Ibáñez, abogados)

Other party/parties to the proceedings: Commission of the Euro-
pean Communities (represented by: H. Kraemer and C. Laden-
burger, as Agents)

Applicant(s): Guido Strack (represented by: L. Füllkrug, Rechtsan-
walt)