Case T-306/08 P: Appeal brought on 1 August 2008 by Kurt-Wolfgang Braun-Neumann against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 23 May 2008 in Case F-79/07, Braun-Neumann v Parliament
Date: 2008-08-01
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Parliament, action by staff, appeal, divorced person, married person, survivor's benefit

C 247/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

27.9.2008

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community
ASHLEY’ for various goods in classes 3, 18, 24 and 25

trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘LAURA

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

sign cited:

International

the figurative mark ‘Ashley's’

trade mark registration
Mark
or
No 311 675 of
for goods in
class 25; Italian trade mark registration No 517 151 of the
figurative mark ‘Ashley's’ for goods in class 3, 18, 24 and 25;
international trade mark registration No 646 926 of the figura-
tive mark ‘Ashley's il primo Cashmere Italiano’ for goods in
class 25

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

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal failed to establish whether the
applicant was using the Community trade mark applied for
without due cause.

Appeal brought on 1 August 2008 by Kurt-Wolfgang
Braun-Neumann against the judgment of the Civil Service
Tribunal delivered on 23 May 2008 in Case F-79/07,
Braun-Neumann v Parliament

(Case T-306/08 P)

(2008/C 247/43)

Language of the case: German

Parties

— in the alternative, refer the case back to the Civil Service

Tribunal of the European Union for judgment.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal is directed against the Civil Service Tribunal's order
of 23 May 2008 in Case F-79/07 Braun-Neumann v Parliament,
dismissing as inadmissible the action brought by the appellant.

The appellant submits in support of his appeal that the Civil
Service Tribunal erred in law in its interpretation of Article 90(2)
of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Commu-
nities, since its interpretation infringes general principles of
Community law. In the appellant's view, the Tribunal's interpre-
tation of a letter as an act adversely affecting it is incorrect.
Further, the principle of legal certainty can be satisfied only if
the absence of information about available legal remedies is
regarded as prejudicial to the determination of when the period
for lodging the complaint commenced, since otherwise the liti-
gant's rights would be undermined. Lastly, the Tribunal's inter-
pretation should be regarded as disproportionate in view of the
consequences for the appellant.

Action brought on 8 August 2008 — BSH Bosch und
Siemens Hausgeräte v OHIM (executive edition)

(Case T-310/08)

(2008/C 247/44)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (Munich,
Germany) (represented by: S. Biagosch, Rechtsanwalt)

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

Appellant: Kurt-Wolfgang Braun-Neumann (Lohr am Main,
Germany) (represented by: P. Ames, Rechtsanwalt)

Form of order sought

Other party to the proceedings: European Parliament

Form of order sought by the appellant

— Set aside the order of the European Union Civil Service

Tribunal of 23 May 2008 in Case F-79/07;

— rule on the merits and uphold the appellant's original appli-
cation and therefore order the Parliament to pay him with
retroactive effect from 1 August 2004 the other half of the
survivor's pension in right of Mrs Mandt in the monthly
sum of EUR 1 670,84 plus interest at the rate applied by
the European Central Bank on the marginal lending facility,
increased by 3 %;

— annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office
for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) of 5 June 2008 in Case R-845/2007-1;

— order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) to bear its own costs and to pay
those of the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned:
edition’
No 4 908 182).

for goods

the word mark ‘executive
in Classes 7, 9 and 11 (application

Decision of the Examiner: rejection of the application.