Case T-100/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 November 2008 — Rajani v OHIM — Artoz-Papier (ATOZ) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ATOZ — Earlier international word mark ARTOZ — No requirement to provide evidence of genuine use — Starting point for the five-year time-limit — Date of registration of the earlier mark — Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Obligation to state the reasons on which a measure is based — Articles 73 and 79 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 and Article 6 of the ECHR)
Date: 2008-11-26
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU trade mark, European Union Intellectual Property Office, action for annulment (EU), trade-mark law

24.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/25

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Joins Case T-362/05 and T-363/05 for the purposes of

the

judgment.

2. Dismisses the actions.

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Deepak Rajani to pay the costs.

3. Orders Nuova Agricast Srl to bear its own costs and to pay those

incurred by the Commission in Case T-362/05.

(1) OJ C 235, 6.10.2007.

4. Orders Cofra Srl to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by

the Commission in Case T-363/05.

(1) OJ C 296, 26.11.2005.

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 November
2008 — Rajani v OHIM — Artoz-Papier (ATOZ)

(Case T-100/06) (1)

(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Appli-
cation for Community word mark ATOZ — Earlier interna-
tional word mark ARTOZ — No requirement to provide
evidence of genuine use — Starting point for the five-year
time-limit — Date of registration of the earlier mark —
Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Likeli-
hood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 — Obligation to state the reasons on which a
measure is based — Articles 73 and 79 of Regulation (EC)
No 40/94 and Article 6 of the ECHR)

(2009/C 19/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Deepak Rajani
A. Dustmann, lawyer)

(Berlin, Germany)

(represented by:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider and
A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 November
2008 — En Route International v OHIM (FRESHHH)

(Case T-147/06) (1)

(Community trade mark — Application for registration of the
word mark FRESHHH as a Community trade mark —
Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character —
Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 19/46)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: En Route International Ltd (Datchet, United Kingdom)
(represented by: W. Göpfert, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: R. Pethke, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 7 March 2006 (Case R 352/2005-4)
concerning registration of the word sign FRESHHH as a Com-
munity trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:
Artoz-Papier AG (Lenzburg, Switzerland)

1. The action is dismissed.

2. En Route International Ltd is ordered to pay the costs.

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of
Appeal of OHIM of 11 January 2006 (Case R 1126/2004-2),
concerning opposition proceedings between Artoz Papier AG
and Deepak Rajani.

(1) OJ C 178 of 29.7. 2006.