CELEX: C2004/071/73
Language: en
Date: 2004-03-20 00:00:00
Title: Case T-29/04: Action brought on 26 January 2004 by Castellblanch, S.A., against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

C 71/42                EN                       Official Journal of the European Union                                         20.3.2004
The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:           Action brought on 26 January 2004 by Castellblanch,
                                                                        S.A., against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                                                                                 Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
—     annul the decision by OHIM (Second Board of Appeal) of
      10 November 2003 in case R 0285/2002-2, which by
      dismissing the applicant’s appeal gives grounds for a                                      (Case T-29/04)
      future right to Community trade mark No 1.155.985,
      ‘THE OBSERVER’, in Classes 18, 25, 28, 35 and 41;
                                                                                                 (2004/C 71/73)
—     refuse registration to Community mark No 1.155.985
      ‘THE OBSERVER’ in Classes 18, 25, 28, 35 and 41;                  (Language of the case: to be determined pursuant to article 131(2)
                                                                        of the Rules of Procedure — language in which the case was
                                                                                                submitted: English)
—     order the party or parties opposing this action to pay the
      costs.
                                                                        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
                                                                        26 January 2004 by Castellblanch, S.A., Sant Sadurni d’Anoia,
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         Spain, represented by Mr F. de Visscher, Mr E. Cornu, Mr E. De
                                                                        Gryse and Ms D. Moreau, lawyers. Champagne Louis Roederer
                                                                        S.A. was also a party to the proceedings before the Board of
                                                                        Appeal.
Applicant for the Com-        Guardian Newspaper Limited
munity trade mark:
                                                                        The applicant claims that the Court should:
Community trade mark          Word mark ‘THE OBSERVER’ —
applied for:                  Application No 1.155.985, for             —     annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the
                              goods and services in Classes 9,                Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of
                              16, 18, 25, 28, 35, 36, 38 and 41               17 November 2003;
Proprietor of the oppos-      Applicant                                 —     Order the OHIM to pay the costs.
ing trade mark or sign:
Opposing trade mark or        Spanish       figurative      mark
sign:                         (No 953.859) and word mark                Pleas in law and main arguments
                              (No 2.116.030) for all goods and
                              services in Classes 18, 25, 28, 35
                              and 41                                    Applicant for the Com-        Castellblanch S.A.
                                                                        munity trade mark:
Decision of the Oppo-         Dismissal of the opposition
                                                                        Community trade mark          Figurative mark ‘CRISTAL CAS-
sition Division:
                                                                        sought:                       TELLBLANCH’ for goods in
                                                                                                      class 33 (wine)
Decision of the Board of      Dismissal of the appeal
Appeal:                                                                 Proprietor of mark or         CHAMPAGNE LOUIS ROEDE-
                                                                        sign cited in the oppo-       RER, S.A.
                                                                        sition proceedings:
Pleas in law:                 —    Sufficient use of the two
                                   marks which form the basis           Mark or sign cited in         National word mark ‘CRISTAL’
                                   for the opposition                   opposition:                   for goods in class 33 (champagne,
                              —    Incorrect application of                                           sparkling wines)
                                   Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of
                                   Regulation (EC) No 40/94.            Decision of the Oppo-         Registration refused
                                                                        sition Division:
                                                                        Decision of the Board of      Appeal rejected
                                                                        Appeal:
 ---pagebreak--- 20.3.2004             EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 71/43
Pleas in law:                 Infringement of articles 43 and             2001 (1). According to the applicant article 4 paragraph 2 of
                              15 of Regulation 40/94 (1).                 Regulation 1049/2001 does not justify a blanket exclusion of
                                                                          the Commission’s pleadings from the principle of open access
                                                                          to Community documents, nor does it give the Commission
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the           the right to refuse access to its pleadings merely because the
    Community trade mark (OJ 11, p. 1).                                   matter itself or related proceedings are still pending.
                                                                          (1) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and
                                                                              of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to
                                                                              European Parliament, Council and Commission documents,
                                                                              Official Journal L 145, 31/05/2001 P. 43-48.
Action brought on 2 February 2004 by Association de la
Presse Internationale a.s.b.l. (‘API’) against the Com-
            mission of the European Communities
                                                                                  Removal from the register of Case T-89/02 (1)
                         (Case T-36/04)
                                                                                                     (2004/C 71/75)
                         (2004/C 71/74)
                                                                                              (Language of the Case: English)
                  (Language of the case: English)
                                                                          By order of 25 November 2003 the President of the Fourth
                                                                          Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                 Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                T-89/02: Check Point Softward Limited v Office for the
European Communities on 2 February 2004 by Association                    Harmonisation of the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
de la Presse Internationale a.s.b.l. (‘API’), Brussels, Belguim,          Design) (OHIM).
represented by Mr S. Völcker, Mr F. Louis and Mr J. Heithecker,
lawyers.
                                                                          (1) OJ C 156 of 29.6.2002.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     Annul Commission Decision D(2003) 30621 of 20 Nov-
      ember 2003 in its entirety and;
—     Order the Commission to bear the costs.
                                                                                 Removal from the register of Case T-307/02 (1)
                                                                                                     (2004/C 71/76)
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                                             (Language of the Case: German)
The applicant is a non-profit organisation of foreign journalists
based in Belgium, aiming to assist its members in reporting
back to their home countries about the European Union. It                 By order of 19 November 2003 the President of the Second
applied to the Commission for access to all the submissions               Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European
made by the Commission in the course of certain proceedings               Communities ordered the removal from the register of Case
before the European Court of Justice and the European Court               T-307/02: Altana Pharma AG v Office for the Harmonisation
of First Instance. Such access was denied by the contested                of the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Design) (OHIM).
decision.
                                                                          (1) OJ C 305 of 7.12.2002.
In support of its application the applicant invokes an infringe-
ment of Articles 2 and 4, paragraph 2, of Regulation 1049/