Case T-180/07: Action brought on 24 May 2007 — Promomadrid Desarrollo Internacional de Madrid v OHIM (MADRIDEXPORTA)
Date: 2007-07-07
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), foreign trade, trade-mark law

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/41

Action brought on 24 May 2007 — Promomadrid
OHIM
Desarrollo

de Madrid

Internacional

v

(MADRIDEXPORTA)

(Case T-180/07)

(2007/C 155/74)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Promomadrid Desarrollo Internacional de Madrid,
S.A. (Madrid) (Represented by: M. Aznar Alonso, lawyer)

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

Forms of order sought

— A declaration that the decision of the First Board of Appeal
of OHIM, of 7 March 2007, in which it rejected the applica-
tion No 4.659.553 for registration of the composite Com-
munity trade mark MADRIDEXPORTA,
in classes 16, 35,
36, 38, 39, 41 and 42 does not comply with Council Regu-
lation (EC) 40/94 on the Community Trade Mark.

— A declaration that Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94
does not apply to composite Community trade mark
MADRIDEXPORTA NO 4.659.553, and that Article 7(3) of
Regulation No 40/94 applies instead.

— Order the defendant and, if appropriate, the intervener, to

pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark applied for: Composite mark ‘MADRIDEX-
PORTA’ (application No 4.659.553), for goods and services in
classes 16, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41 and 42.

Decision of the examiner: Reject the application.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Reject the appeal.

in law:

Incorrect application of Article 7(1)(c) and
Pleas
Article 7(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Com-
munity Trade Mark.

Action brought on 28 May 2007 — Poland v Commission

(Case T-183/07)

(2007/C 155/75)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Poland (represented by E. Ośniecka-
Tamecka, Agent)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— annul, on the basis of Article 230 EC, in whole or in part,
Commission decision C(2007) 1295 final of 26 March
2007 concerning the national allocation plan for greenhouse
gas emission allowances notified by Poland in accordance
with Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council;

— give judgment in Polish in accordance with Article 35(2) of

the Rules of Procedure of the Court;

— order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by Poland.

Pleas in law and main arguments

seeks

applicant

the Council (1),

The
annulment of Commission Decision
C(2007) 1295 final of 26 March 2007 concerning the national
allocation plan for greenhouse gas emission allowances notified
the
by Poland in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC of
European Parliament and of
in which the
Commission decided that certain aspects of the Polish National
Allocation Plan for CO2 Emission Allowances for 2008-2012,
notified to the Commission on 30 June 2006, were not compa-
tible with Articles 9(1) and (3), 10 and 13(2) of and the criteria
set out in Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC. That decision sets
the average annual allocation of emission allowances in Poland
for 2008-2012 at approximately 208.5 million tonnes of
carbon dioxide equivalent.
It thereby reduces by 26.7 % the
carbon dioxide emission limit of 284.6 million tonnes in 2008-
2012 proposed by Poland in the national allocation plan for
emission allowances notified to the Commission.

The applicant submits, as grounds of the application, that the
Commission, by taking the decision after the expiry of
the
three-month period for rejection of the national allocation plan
notified by Poland in whole or in one aspect of it, infringed
Article 9(3) of Directive 2003/87/EC. The applicant thereby
complains that the Commission breached essential procedural
requirements and exceeded its powers.

The applicant moreover complains that the Commission, when
assessing the national allocation plan for allowances for 2008-
2012 submitted by Poland, unjustifiably failed to assess the facts
submitted by Poland in the national allocation plan and replaced
an analysis of
its own facts
those facts by an analysis of
obtained as a result of the inconsistent application of the model
of economic analysis chosen by the Commission, and thereby
infringed Article 9(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC and criterion 3
set out in Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC. The applicant
thereby complains that
the Commission infringed essential
procedural requirements.

In addition, the applicant complains that the Commission brea-
ched essential procedural requirements, and asserts that, by
failing to take account when adopting the contested decision of
international decisions binding on the Community (in particular
the Kyoto Protocol), it infringed criteria 1, 2 and 12 set out in
Annex III to Directive 2003/87/EC.