Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 27.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/43 |

---

Action brought on 29 June 2011 — Event v OHIM — CBT Comunicación Multimedia (eventer EVENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS)

(Case T-353/11)

2011/C 252/94

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Event Holding GmbH & Co. KG (Köln, Germany) (represented by: G. Schoenen and V. Töbelmann, lawyers)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: CBT Comunicación Multimedia, SL (Getxo, Spain)

Form of order sought

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Overturn the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 March 2011 in case R 939/2010-2; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Order the defendant to pay its own costs as well as the costs of the Applicant; and |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Order the other party to the proceedings, if it becomes intervener before the Tribunal to bear its own costs. |

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘eventer EVENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS’, for goods and services in classes 9, 35, 41 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 6483606

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German trade mark registration No 39 548 073.6 of the word mark ‘Event’, for services in classes 35, 36, 42 and 43

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

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal wrongly found that there were no grounds for a rejection of the Community trade mark application ‘eventer EVENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS’. Given the similarity of the trade marks, and the similarity of the services covered by both trade marks, there is a likelihood of confusion between the two trade marks.

---

[Top](#document1)