Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 24.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 256/32 |

---

Action brought on 25 August 2009 — Häfele v OHIM — Topcom Europe (Topcom)

(Case T-336/09)

2009/C 256/57

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicants: Häfele GmbH & Co. KG (Nagold, Germany) (represented by: J. Dönch, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Topcom Europe NV (Heverlee, Belgium)

Form of order sought

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Repeal the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 June 2009 in case R 1500/2008-2; and |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs. |

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark “Topcom”, for goods in classes 7, 9 and 11

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited: Community trade mark registration of the word mark “TOPCOM” for goods in class 9; Benelux trade mark registration of the word mark “TOPCOM” for goods in class 9.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Upheld the appeal, allowed the opposition and annulled the decision of the Opposition Division

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Council Regulation 40/94 (which became Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 207/2009) as the Board of Appeal wrongly held that there was a likelihood of confusion between the trade marks concerned, due to the fact that the goods in question are not similar nor complementary.

---

[Top](#document1)