Case T-378/07: Action brought on 2 October 2007 — CNH Global v OHIM (Figurative mark representing a tractor in red, black and grey)
Date: 2007-12-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), tractor, trade-mark law

8.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/43

In addition, the applicant claims that there has been an infringe-
ment of the principle of nemini licet venire contra factum proprium
(estoppel), because several Commission documents show that
it does not have the
the Commission itself assumes that
authority to conduct an ex-post control without cause.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on
the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to
small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ 2001 L 10, p. 33).

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 994/98 of 7 May 1998 on the applica-
tion of Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty establishing the European
Community to certain categories of horizontal State aid (OJ 1998
L 142, p. 1).

— order

the Commission (DIGIT)

to pay the applicant's
damages suffered on account of the tendering procedure in
question for an amount of EUR 3,5 million for lot 2.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant submitted a bid in response to the defendant's
call
‘content
an
for
interoperability
eGovernment
services’ (OJ 2006/S 128-136080). The applicant contests the
decision to reject its bid and to award the contract to another
bidder.

open
tender
technologies

the
European

contract

for
for

Action brought on 24 September 2007 — Evropaïki
Dynamiki v Commission

(1) JO 2007 C 235, p. 22.

The pleas in law and main arguments relied on by the applicant
are identical
to those relied on in Case T-300/07 Evropaïki
Dynamiki v Commission (1).

(Case T-377/07)

(2007/C 297/87)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 2 October 2007 — CNH Global v OHIM
(Figurative mark representing a tractor in red, black and
grey)

Parties

Applicant:
Systimata
Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena
Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by:
N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Parties

(Case T-378/07)

(2007/C 297/88)

Language of the case: English

Form of order sought

— Annul the Commission's decision of the Direction General
for Informatics to reject the bid of the applicant — filed in
response to the open Call
for Tender ENTR/05/86 —
Content Interoperability for European eGovernment Services
(OJ S 128, 8.7.2006) communicated to the applicant by
letter dated 13 July 2007 and to award the contracts to the
successful contractor;

(repre-
Applicant: CNH Global NV (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
sented by: M. Edenborough, Barrister, and R. Harrison, Solicitor)

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

Form of order sought

— The decision of the First Board of Appeal No R 1642/2006-

1 be annulled in its entirety; and

— order the Commission (DIGIT) to pay the applicant's legal
and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with
this application, even if the current application is rejected;

— the Office pays to the applicant/appellant the costs incurred
by the applicant/appellant in connection with this appeal.

C 297/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.12.2007

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: A figurative mark representing a
tractor in red, black and grey for goods in class 12 — applica-
tion No 3 944 139

Decision of the examiner: Refusal of the application

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Mark or sign cited: The community and national word mark
‘Aygill's’ for goods in classes 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21,
24, 25, 26, 27 and 28

Decision of
entirety

the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in its

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the Opposition
Division's decision and rejection of the opposition in its entirety

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (3) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 as the figurative mark applied for had
acquired distinctive character through use.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regu-
lation No 40/94

Action brought on 4 October 2007 — Peek & Cloppenburg
v OHIM — Redfil (Agile)

Action brought on 11 October 2007 — Portuguese
Republic v Commission

(Case T-386/07)

(2007/C 297/89)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

(Case T-387/07)

(2007/C 297/90)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg (KG)
(Hamburg, Germany)
(represented by: T. Dolde, A. Renck and V. von Bomhard,
lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Redfil SL
(Barcelona, Spain)

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the
(Trade
in Case

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Marks
of
and Designs)
No R 1324/2006-2; and

2007

July

26

Parties

Applicant: Portuguese Republic (Lisbon, Portugal)
by: L. Inês Fernandes, S. Rodrigues and A. Gattini, Agents)

(represented

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— annulment

1

of Article

of Commission Decision
C(2007) 3772 of 31 July 2007 reducing the assistance
granted by the European Regional Development Fund for
the global grant ‘SGAIA’ (global grant for local development)
pursuant to Decision C(95) 1769 of the European Commis-
sion of 28 July 1995;

— order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the

defendant.

— an order that the Commission of the European Commu-

nities should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Redfil SL

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Agile’ for
goods in classes 18, 25 and 28 — application No 2 659 456

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

Lack of clarity in the statement of reasons. With the expression
‘as shown above’, the defendant makes a generic reference to the
summarily carried out and reconstructed in the
analysis
contested decision. In Chapter 6,
‘Conclusions’, the defendant
does not clearly identify what are the laws or provisions
infringed by the Portuguese Republic.