Case T-214/08: Action brought on 9 June 2008 — Paul Alfons Rehbein v OHIM — Hervé Dias Martinho and Manuel Dias Martinho (Outburst)
Date: 2008-06-09
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), clothing industry, trade-mark law

C 197/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2008

Action brought on 4 June 2008 — Amertranseuro
International Holdings and Others v Commission

Action brought on 9 June 2008 — Paul Alfons Rehbein v
OHIM — Hervé Dias Martinho and Manuel Dias Martinho
(Outburst)

(Case T-212/08)

(2008/C 197/55)

Language of the case: English

(Case T-214/08)

(2008/C 197/56)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicants: Amertranseuro International Holdings Ltd (London,
United Kingdom), Trans Euro Ltd (London, United Kingdom)
and Team Relocations Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (repre-
sented by: L. Gyselen, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul Article 2(i) of the Commission Decision of 11 March
in Case COMP/38.543 — International removal services, in
so far as it holds the applicants jointly and severally liable
for Team Relocations NV's
infringement of
Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA in the period of January
1997 to September 2003;

alleged

Parties

Applicant: Paul Alfons Rehbein (GmbH & Co.) KG (Glinde,
Germany) (represented by: T. E. Lampel, lawyer)

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

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Hervé
Dias Martinho and Manuel Carlos Dias Martinho (Le Plessis
Trévise, France)

Form of order sought

— in the alternative, annul Article 2(i) of this Commission deci-
sion in so far as it does not effectively limit the joint and
several
liability of Amertranseuro Ltd to the amount of
EUR 1,3 million;

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 13 March 2008 in case R 1261/2007-2;
and

— order the costs of

the proceedings to be borne by the

Commission.

— order OHIM to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

seek

partial

pursuant

applicants

annulment,

The
to
Article 230 EC, of Commission Decision C(2008) 926 final of
11 March (Case COMP/38.543 — International
removal
services)
(‘the contested decision’), relating to a proceeding
under Article 81(1) EC and Article 53(1) EEA. More specifically,
the applicants
the
contested decision in so far as it holds them jointly and severally
liable for the alleged participation of Team Relocations NV
(‘TRNV’)
the
contested decision.

in the infringement described in Article 1 of

seek the annulment of Article 2(i) of

The applicants put forward two pleas in law in support of their
claims:

First, they submit that the Commission erred by holding all
three of them liable in spite of the fact that they were neither
aware, nor could have been aware of TRNV's involvement in the
alleged infringement. Second,
the
Commission misused its powers by imposing a fine which they
are unable to pay.

the applicants claim that

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The other parties to the
proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Outburst’
for goods in classes 16, 18 and 25 — application No 4 318 333

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

Mark or sign cited: The national word mark ‘Outburst’ for goods
in class 25 — German trade mark registration No 399 40 713

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition in
its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 43(2) and (3) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 as the earlier national trade mark has
been put to genuine use in connection with the goods and
infringement of
services in respect of which it is registered;

2.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/33

Article 76(1)(f) of the said regulation as the Board of Appeal
erred in not taking into account the affidavit of the applicant's
managing director;
infringement of Article 74(2) of the said
regulation and of Rul 22(1) and (2) of Commission Regulation
No 2868/95 (1) as the further evidence submitted at the appeal's
stage of the opposition proceedings is admissible and has to be
taken into account when assessing the genuine use of the oppo-
sition mark; infringement of applicant's right to be heard as the
Board of Appeal should have taken into account evidence of use
submitted after the time limit.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995
implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community
trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1).

Action brought on 11 June 2008 — Lemans v OHIM —
Stephen Turner (ICON)

(Case T-218/08)

(2008/C 197/57)

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘ICON’ for
goods and services in classes 9, 18 and 25 — application
No 2 197 366

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The
other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited: The national word mark ‘IKON’ for goods in
class 9 — UK trade mark registration No 2 243 676

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the application in
its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: The Board of Appeal erred in its finding that the
other party to the proceedings before it had locus standi to file
the opposition.

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Action brought on 13 June 2008 — Impala v Commission

Parties

(Case T-229/08)

(2008/C 197/58)

Applicant: Lemans Corporation (Janesville, United States) (repre-
sented by: M. Cover, Solicitor)

Language of the case: English

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

Parties

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Stephen
Turner (Luddington, United Kingdom)

Applicant: Independent Music Publishers and Labels Association
(repre-
(Impala,
sented by: S. Crosby,
J. Golding, Solicitors, and I. Wekstein,
lawyer)

international association)

(Brussels, Belgium)

Form of order sought

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

— Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 28 March 2008 in case R 589/2007-2;

Form of order sought

— declare that the opposition be dismissed and that Com-
munity trade mark concerned may proceed to registration;
and

— order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of
including the appeals before the

Appeal to pay the costs,
Board of Appeal and the Court of First Instance.

— annul the Commission's Decision of 3 October 2007 in
Case No COMP/M.3333-Sony/BMG declaring a concentra-
tion compatible with the common market and the func-
tioning of the EEA Agreement, in accordance with Article 8
(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1);

— order the Commission to pay the costs.