CELEX: C2004/179/12
Language: en
Date: 2004-07-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-206/04 P: Appeal brought on 10 May 2004 by Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG against the judgment delivered on 3 March 2004 by the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case T-355/02 between Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being Zirh International Corp.

10.7.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 179/6
            
         Appeal brought on 10 May 2004 by Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG against the judgment delivered on 3 March 2004 by the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case T-355/02 between Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being Zirh International Corp.
   (Case C-206/04 P)
   (2004/C 179/12)
   An appeal against the judgment delivered on 3 March 2004 by the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case T-355/02 (1) between Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG and the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM), the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being Zirh International Corp., was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 10 May 2004 by Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG, established in Cologne (Germany), represented by T. Schulte-Beckhausen, lawyer.
   The Appellant claims that the Court should:
   
               1.
            
            
               annul the decision of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 3 March 2004 (Case T-355/02) and also the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the defendant and appellee of 1 October 2002 (Case No. R-657/2001-2);
            
         
               2.
            
            
               order the defendant and appellee to pay the costs in total.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments:
   The appellant submits that, given the similarity of the goods and services in question and the similarity in sound of the opposed marks, the Court of First Instance should have come to the conclusion that there is a likelihood of confusion between the opposed marks, pursuant to Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 (2).
   The appellant therefore maintains that the Court of First Instance has misconstrued the requirements of Article 8(1)(b) and that the contested judgment should be annulled.
   
      (1)  OJ C 70, 22.03.2003, p. 23.
   
      (2)  Of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ L 11, 14.01.1994, p. 1), as amended.