Case T-223/08: Action brought on 12 June 2008 — Iranian Tobacco v OHIM — AD Bulgartabac (Bahman)
Date: 2008-06-12
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), tobacco, tobacco industry, trade-mark law

C 223/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

— order

the European Commission to pay the applicant
compensation for the immaterial and moral damage suffered
by the applicant as a result of the processing of his applica-
least symbolic
tion, of an appropriate amount, but at
damages in the amount of 1 Euro;

— order the European Commission to pay the costs of the

procedure

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of

6 March 2008 in Case R 1257/2006-1;

— Alter that decision so that the appeal is dismissed;

— Order the intervener to pay the costs of the proceedings,

including the costs of the appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

On 18 and 19 January 2008, the applicant applied to the
Commission for access to numerous documents. The applicant
brings the present application because he was not granted
access to those documents, at least partly, within the period
provided for.

In support of his application, the applicant submits, in particu-
lar, that the defendant infringed Article 255 EC as well as
Regulation No 1049/2001 (1). In addition, the applicant claims
that there has been an infringement of the principles of good
administration, Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter of Funda-
mental Rights and the principles governing the obligation to
state reasons for refusal decisions laid down in Article 253 EC.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European
Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145,
p. 43)

Action brought on 9 June 2008 — Sanatur v OHIM —
Sektkellerei Schloss Wachenheim (life light)

(Case T-222/08)

(2008/C 223/80)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Sanatur GmbH.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘life light’ for goods
in Class 32 (Application No 3 192 481).

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:
Sektkellerei Schloss Wachenheim AG.

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German figurative mark ‘LIGHT
live’ for goods in Class 32 (Mark No 302 00 216).

Decision of the Opposition Division: Dismissal of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annul the decision of the Oppo-
sition Division.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 (1) in that no likelihood of confusion exists between
the conflicting marks.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

Action brought on 12 June 2008 — Iranian Tobacco v
OHIM — AD Bulgartabac (Bahman)

(Case T-223/08)

(2008/C 223/81)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Sanatur GmbH (Singen, Germany)
M. Wiume, lawyer)

(represented by:

Parties

Applicant: Iranian Tobacco Company (Teheran, Iran) (represented
by: M. Beckensträter, lawyer)

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

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Sektkellerei Schloss Wachenheim AG (Trier, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
AD Bulgartabac Holding (Sofia, Bulgaria)

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/47

Forms of order sought

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Schwarzbräu GmbH (Zusmarshausen, Germany)

— Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of 10 April

2008 — R 709/2007-1, notified on 15 April 2008;

— Order AD Bulgartabac Holding to pay the reimbursable
costs, including those of the main proceedings and including
those of the defendant;

— In the alternative, while annulling the decision of 10 April
2008 and that of 7 March 2007 — 1415C — declare that
the application by AD Bulgartabac Holding of 8 November
2005 was inadmissible.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which revocation was
applied for: the figurative mark ‘Bahman’ for goods in Class 34
(Community trade mark No 427 336).

Form of order sought

— Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the
(Trade

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
Marks and Designs) of 8 April 2008 (Case R 877/2004-4);

— Completely delete the Community trade mark No 505 552
‘ALASKA’ owing to the existence of absolute grounds for
refusal;

— Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings;

— In the alternative to the second application, declare Com-
munity trade mark No 505 552 ‘ALASKA’ invalid at least in
respect of the following goods:
‘Mineral waters and carbo-
nated waters and other non-alcoholic drinks in Class 32’.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Iranian Tobacco Company.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant in the revocation proceedings: AD Bulgartabac Holding.

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Decision declaring the Com-
munity trade mark concerned to be revoked.

Decision of
appeal.

the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of

the applicant's

Pleas
in law: The admissibility requirements concerning the
application by AD Bulgartabac Holding which OHIM is obliged
to consider of its own motion were not taken into account,
contrary to Community law, Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) and
other principles of procedure.

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of
invalidity has been sought: the figurative mark ‘ALASKA’ for goods
in Class 32 (Community trade mark No 505 552)

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Schwarzbräu GmbH

Applicant
of
the
Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel GmbH

declaration

for

invalidity: Mineralbrunnen

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the application
for the declaration of invalidity of the trade mark concerned.

Decision of
appeal.

the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of

the applicant's

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

Pleas in law:
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1).

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b),

(c) and (g) of

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the

Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

Action brought on 13 June 2008 — Mineralbrunnen
Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel v OHIM — Schwarzbräu
(ALASKA)

(Case T-225/08)

(2008/C 223/82)

Action brought on 13 June 2008 — Mineralbrunnen
Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel v OHIM — Schwarzbräu
(Alaska)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

(Case T-226/08)

(2008/C 223/83)

Parties

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Applicant: Mineralbrunnen Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel GmbH
(Ebersburg, Germany) (represented by: P. Wadenbach, lawyer)

Parties

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

Applicant: Mineralbrunnen Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel GmbH
(Ebersburg, Germany) (represented by: P. Wadenbach, lawyer)