Case T-451/08: Action brought on 2 October 2008 — Stim v Commission
Date: 2008-10-02
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Community, Sweden, action for annulment (EU), copyright, intellectual property, music, restriction on competition

C 313/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.12.2008

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — FIFA v OHIM —
Ferrero (WORLD CUP 2006 GERMANY)

(Case T-448/08)

(2008/C 313/92)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Fédération Internationale de Football Association
(FIFA) (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: D. Alexander QC,
A. Barav, Barrister, R. Buchel and C. Rassmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ferrero
OHG mbH (Stadtallendorf, Germany)

Form of order sought

— Annul, in whole or in part, the decision of the First Board
of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 June 2008 in case
R 1470/2005-1; and

— Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the application for a
Registered Community trade mark subject of
declaration of
invalidity: The word mark ‘WORLD CUP 2006
GERMANY’ for goods and services in classes 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,
11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 25, 28, 29, 30, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41
and 42 — Community trade mark registration No 2 047 843

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade
mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of
Appeal

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the application
for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the decision of the
Cancellation Division

Pleas in law: (i) Infringement of Article 73 and 74(1) of Council
Regulation No 40/94 in so far as the Board of Appeal has
based, largely, its decision on Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regu-
lation No 40/94, a provision which was neither invoked by the
other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, nor
relied upon by the Cancellation Division;
(ii) Alternatively,
infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation No 40/94
as the Board of Appeal failed to consider the registered Com-

through the eyes of

invalidity as a whole,

munity trade mark subject of the application for a declaration
of
the average
consumer and to apply the relevant law relating to the assess-
ment of descriptiveness of the goods and/or services applied for;
and (iii) Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation
No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred in its finding that the
registered Community trade mark subject of the application for
a declaration of invalidity was devoid of the necessary distinctive
character.

Action brought on 2 October 2008 — Stim v Commission

(Case T-451/08)

(2008/C 313/93)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Föreningen Svenska Tonsättares Internationella Musik-
byrå
(represented by:
(Stockholm, Sweden)
C. Thomas, Solicitor and N. Pourbaix, lawyer)

(Stim) u.p.a.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul Articles 3 and 4(2), and Article 4(3) to the extent
that it refers to Article 3, of the Commission decision of
16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC
and Article 53 EEA in case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC;

— Order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of its application the applicant seeks partial annul-
ment of the Commission decision of 16 July 2008 relating to a
proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA (Case
COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC) and in particular, of its Article 3,
the EEA CISAC (1) members engaged in a
determining that
concerted practice
in violation of Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA by coordinating the territorial delineations of
the reciprocal representation mandates granted to one another
in a way which limits a licence to the domestic territory of each
collecting society.

In support of its claims the applicant submits the following:

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/53

According to the applicant
the contested decision infringes
Article 151(4) EC in that the Commission did not sufficiently
take into account the consequences for cultural diversity in
Europe in requiring termination of the alleged concerted prac-
tice on the territorial delineation of mandates granted by EEA
collecting societies to other EEA collecting societies to issue
licences of their repertoire for satellite, cable and internet use.
Moreover,
the decision will harm
cultural diversity in Europe, since authors of music of a less
extensive cultural appeal will lose the certainty they have under
the current system, that their music will be licensed and that
revenues will be received in respect of all the territories in
which their music may be performed.

the applicant claims that

The applicant further submits that the Commission should have
taken into account the fact that the restriction of competition it
identified is fictitious or, at most, marginal. In deed, in the appli-
cant's submission, there is no restriction of competition within
the meaning of Article 81(1) EC. Hence, the applicant claims
that the Commission committed an error of law, or a manifest
error of appreciation, when applying the aforementioned provi-
sion. Finally, the applicant contends that the Commission could
have lawfully exempted the concerted practice pursuant
to
Article 81(3) EC. By not doing so, it needlessly caused harm to
cultural diversity in Europe.

(1) International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers.

Action brought on 10 October 2008 — Commission v
Acentro Turismo

(Case T-460/08)

(2008/C 313/94)

Language of the case: Italian

— order that company to pay the sum of EUR 2 278,55 in
lodging of the
default interest payable up to the date of
present application, and default
interest which will be
payable after the date of lodging of this application up to
the date of the actual payment of the capital, to be quanti-
fied ultimately on the basis of the interest rate established by
Italian law;

— order that company to pay default interest on the aforesaid
interest payable up to the date of lodging of the present
application, to be quantified ultimately on the basis of the
interest rate established by Italian law;

— order that company to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

to order

By the present application the European Commission, as
the European Atomic Energy Community
representative of
the company incor-
the Court
(Euratom), asks
porated under Italian law, Acentro Turismo SpA, to pay the sum
of EUR 13 497,46, plus default interest, owed on the basis of
the rules
relating to performance laid down by contract
No 349-90-04 TL ISP I for the provision of services, concluded
in 1990 and intended to give that company the functions of
travel agent on the Ispra site.

The Commission submits in that regard that Acentro did not
honour two invoices, issued by the Commission itself on the
basis of Article 8 of the contested contract, and that the exis-
tence of that credit is sufficiently proven with regard to the
content of that contract and the credit in question is therefore
irrefutable, liquid and collectable.

Action brought on 13 October 2008 — Zeta Europe v
OHIM (Superleggera)

(Case T-464/08)

(2008/C 313/95)

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: A. Aresu, A. Caeiros, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Acentro Turismo SpA (Milan, Italy)

Parties

Form of order sought

Applicant: Zeta Europe BV (Het Ambacht, Netherlands) (repre-
sented by V. Bilardo, C. Bacchini and M. Mazzitelli, lawyers)

— order Acentro Turismo SpA to pay

the

sum of

EUR 13 497,46 by way of capital;

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