Case T-106/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 January 2008 — Demp v OHIM — BAU HOW (BAU HOW) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark BAU HOW — Earlier figurative marks BAUHAUS — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(a) and (b), and Article 73 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Date: 2008-01-23
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), building materials, hand tool, tool industry, trade-mark law

C 64/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.3.2008

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 January 2008
— Demp v OHIM — BAU HOW (BAU HOW)

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 January 2008
— Japan Tobacco v OHIM — Torrefacção Camelo
(CAMELO)

(Case T-106/06) (1)

(Case T-128/06) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Appli-
cation for Community figurative mark BAU HOW — Earlier
figurative marks BAUHAUS — Relative ground for refusal
— No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(a) and (b), and
Article 73 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 64/57)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Demp BV, formerly Demp Holding BV (Maastricht,
Netherlands) (represented by: R.-D. Härer, C. Schultze, J Ossing
and C. Weber, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
BAU HOW GmbH (Hattersheim/Okriftel, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 31 January 2006 (Case R 92/2004-4) on
opposition proceedings between Demp BV and BAU HOW
GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

1. The action is dismissed;

2. Demp BV is ordered to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 143 of 17.6.2006.

(Community trade mark — Opposition procedure — Applica-
tion for the Community figurative mark CAMELO — Earlier
national figurative mark CAMEL — Relative ground for
refusal — No risk of profit derived unduly from, and no risk
of detriment to, the distinctive character and reputation of the
earlier mark — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 —
No infringement of the rules of the appeal procedure —
Article 74 of Regulation No 40/94)

(2008/C 64/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Japan Tobacco, Inc. (Tokyo, Japan)

Applicant:
(represented by:
A. Ortiz López, S. Ferrandis González and E. Ochoa Santamaría,
lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks
Folliard-
Monguiral, Agent)

(represented by: A.

and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM
intervening before the Court of First Instance: Torrefacção Camelo
Lda (Campo Maior, Portugal) (represented by: A. De Sampaio,
I. Cavalho Franco and C. de Almeida Carvalho, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 22 February 2006 (Case R 669/2003-2)
concerning opposition proceedings between Japan Tobacco, Inc.
and Torrefacção Camelo Lda.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Japan Tobacco, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those
of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade
Marks and Designs)(OHIM);

3. Orders Torrefacção Camelo Lda to bear its own costs.

(1) OJ C 154, 1.7.2006.