Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

29.11.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 289/27

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Community trade mark The word mark ‘CLIMATIC’ —
sought: Application No 1705557

Goods or services: Goods and services in Classes 11,
12 and 37 ( _inter alia_, apparatus
for heating, steam generating,
refrigerating, drying and ventilating; repair)

Decision contested Refusalby the examiner to register
before the Board of the mark in respect of goods and
Appeal: services in Classes 11 and 37

Decision of the Board of Dismissal of the appeal
Appeal:

Pleas in law: — Infringement of Article 74(1)
of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

—
Legally incorrect application
of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

**Action brought on 11 September 2003 by Kreuzer**
**Medien GmbH against the European Parliament and the**
**Council of the European Union**

**(Case T-310/03)**

(2003/C 289/57)

_(Language of the case: German)_

An action against the European Parliament and the Council of
the European Union was brought before the Court of Justice
of the European Communities on 11 September 2003 by
Kreuzer Medien GmbH, represented by Dr U. Kornmeier and
Dr D. Valbert.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
declare Article 3(1) of Directive 2003/33/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003
on the approximation of the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions of the Member States relating
to the advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products ( [1] )
void;

— order the defendant to bear the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

The applicant runs a medium-sized publishing company and
publishes the Leipzig magazine ‘Kreuzer’. The magazine is
financed _inter alia_ by tobacco advertising.

The applicant seeks a declaration that Article 3(1) of Directive
2003/33/EC is void. It argues that the directive breaches
Community law from several points of view. The directive
infringes Article 251 EC as the published version of the
directive differs from that adopted by the Council and the
Parliament. Further, the directive breaches Article 95 EC, as, in
the case of a local or regional magazine such as that produced
by the applicant, there are no internal market implications and
the Community legislature thus has no role to play.

The applicant submits further that the directive is vague and
thus breaches the constitutional requirement of certainty. It
also infringes the requirement under Article 253 EC that
reasons should be stated, as no reasons are actually given
regarding the existence of obstacles to trade which could be
removed by the directive.

Furthermore, the applicant submits that the directive infringes
the freedom of expression safeguarded by Article 11 of the
Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union and
Article 10(1) of the ECHR. That includes the right to ‘commercial speech’. The directive prejudices the placing of advertising
and positive editorial reporting, without thereby in any way
allowing the objective of the directive to be attained. Finally,
the directive infringes entrepreneurial freedom, the property
rights of the applicant and the prohibition on going beyond
what is necessary laid down by the third paragraph of Article 5
EC.

( [1] ) OJ 2003 L 152, p. 16.

**Action brought on 15 September 2003 by Hans-Peter**
**Wilfer against the Office for Harmonisation inthe Internal**
**Market (Trade marks and Designs) (OHIM)**

**(Case T-315/03)**

(2003/C 289/58)

_(Language of the case: German)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
15 September 2003 by Hans-Peter Wilfer, represented by
A. Kockläuner, lawyer.

C 289/28 EN Official Journal of the European Union 29.11.2003

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul the Decision of the defendant’s Second Board of
Appeal of 11 July 2003 in Case R 266/2002-1 in its
entirety;

—
order the defendant to pay the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Community trade mark Word mark ‘Rockbass’ — Appliapplied for: cation No 2401123

Goods or services: Goods in Classes 9, 15 and 18
( _inter alia_, technical sound equipment, musical instruments and
containers)

Decision appealed to the Examiner’s refusal to register
Board of Appeal:

Decision of the Board of Dismissal of the appeal
Appeal:

Pleas in law: — infringement of
Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94;

—
infringement of the principle
of examination of the facts
by the Office of its own
motion pursuant to
Article 74(1)(1) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94;

— infringement of essential
procedural requirements.

**Action brought on 12 September 2003 by Münchener**
**Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft** **Aktiengesellschaft**
**against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
**Market (Trade marks and Designs) (OHIM)**

**(Case T-316/03)**

(2003/C 289/59)

_(Language of the case: German)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
on 12 September 2003 by Münchener RückversicherungsGesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft, represented by G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—
annul the Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
26 June 2003 in Case R 337/2002-4 relating to Community trade mark application 1 708 973 ‘MunichFinancialServices’ (word mark);

—
order the defendant to pay the costs.

_Pleas in law and main arguments_

Community trade mark Word mark ‘MunichFinancialsought: Services’ — Application
No 1 708 973

Goods or services: Services in Classes 36 (financial
services)

Decision appealed to the Examiner’s refusal to register
Board of Appeal:

Decision of the Board of Dismissal of appeal
Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of
Regulation (EC) No 40/94

**Action brought on 23 September 2003 by E-Sim Limited**
**against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
**Market (Trade Marks and Designs)**

**(Case T-325/03)**

(2003/C 289/60)

_(Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)_
_of the Rules of Procedure — Language in which the application was_
_submitted: German)_

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
23 September 2003 by E-Sim Limited, represented by Dr
Andreas Ebert-Weidenfeller. Druckhaus Remstal-Bote GmbH,
Waiblingen (Germany) was also a party to the proceedings
before the Board of Appeal.