Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 24.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/24 |

---

Action brought on 5 February 2007 — Borco-Marken-Import Matthiesen v OHIM (α)

(Case T-23/07)

(2007/C 69/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Borco-Marken-Import Matthiesen GbmH & Co. KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by M. Wolter, lawyer)

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

Form of order sought

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 30 November 2006 in Case R 0808/2006-4; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Declare that the provisions of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) 40/94 do not preclude publication of the mark applied for in respect of goods in Class 33 (‘alcoholic beverages (excluding beer), wines, sparkling wines and beverages containing wine’); |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs. |

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘α ’for goods in Class 33 (Application No 4 634 663).

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection of the application.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94[(1)](#ntr1-C_2007069EN.01002401-E0001), in that it is wrongly held that absolute grounds for refusal exist. Furthermore, the scope and meaning of Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 are misconstrued.

---

[Top](#document1)