Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

C 31/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2.2.2002

— —
failure by the Commission to take into account the fact to order the OHIM to register the trademark ‘Nicole’ for
that the applicant has fulfilled its obligations under the goods of class 3 including essential oils, cosmetics, hair
contract, whereas Clause 2(c) of the General Terms and lotions, dentifrices and nail polish.
Conditions of the Contract expressly provides that a
contractor is not to be liable for a contractor which does
not fulfil its obligations if it can show that it has not
_Pleas in law and main arguments_
contributed to such failure to fulfil obligations. In that
regard, the defendant had overrated the obligations
Applicant for the Com- OPI Products Inc.
attaching to the project coordinator;
munity trade mark:

—
the defendant disregarded in the present case the duties
The Community trade The verbal mark ‘Nicole’ for goods
enshrined in Article 1375 of the Italian Civil Code so far
mark concerned: in class 3.
as concerns the principle of good faith and the protection
of legitimate expectations. Proprietor of the right to Maxim Marken-Produkte GmbH
the trade mark or sign & Co. KG.
asserted by way of oppoMore generally, the applicant states that the object of the sition in the opposition
contract in question is not for the supply of a piece of proceedings:
equipment or merely white goods, but of a thermal power
station whose technological characteristics should have proved Trade mark or sign The national verbal mark ‘Nicole’
to be something new and truly innovative. The applicant asserted by way of oppo- for certain goods in class 3
therefore claims that the Commission’s conduct in the per- sition in the opposition
formance of the contract should have been quite different to proceedings:
that adopted, since the defendant was not in actual fact a party
to a synallagmatic contract, but a partner in the full sense of Decision of the Oppo- Partial rejection of the Oppothe word, sharing the contracting parties’ interest in developing sition Division: sition.
technology within the Member States.
Decision of the Board of Annulment of the Decision of the
Appeal: Opposition Division for ‘dentrifices’ in class 3 and dismissal of the
further appeal by OPI Products
Inc.

Grounds of claim: Violation of Article 43(2) of
Council Regulation 40/94 in that
**Action brought on 23 November 2001 by OPI Products**
the proof of the use of the mark
**Inc. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal**
**Market** asserted by way of opposition was
insufficient. The applicant further
claims a violation of article 8(1)b
**(Case T-288/01)** of Council Regulation 40/94 since
there is no likelihood of confusion
or similarity of goods.
(2002/C 31/30)

_(Language of the case: English)_

**Removal from the Register of Case T-108/00** ( [1] )
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 23 November 2001 by OPI (2002/C 31/31)
Products Inc., represented by Mr Emmanuel Cornu and Mr Eric
De Gryse of Braun Bigwood SCRL, Brussels (Belgium). _(Language of the case: French)_

A further party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
was Maxim Marken-Produkte GmbH & Co. KG. By order of 12 September 2001, the President of the Third
Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of
Case T-108/00: Santiago Go´mez-Reino v Commission of the
The applicant claims that the Court should:
European Communities.

—
annul the decision of the third Board of Appeal in so far
as it denies registration of the contested CTM application ( [1] ) OJ C 176 of 24.6.2000.
No 737 510 for the word mark ‘Nicole’ for ‘essential oils,
cosmetics, hair lotions; including nail polish’ in class 3;