CELEX: 62015TN0609
Language: en
Date: 2015-10-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-609/15: Action brought on 29 October 2015 — Repsol v OHIM — Basic (BASIC)

25.1.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 27/63
            
         Action brought on 29 October 2015 — Repsol v OHIM — Basic (BASIC)
   (Case T-609/15)
   (2016/C 027/81)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Repsol, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J. Devaureix, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Basic AG Lebensmittelhandel (München, Germany)
   
      Details of the proceedings before OHIM
   
   
      Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
   
      Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘BASIC’– Community trade mark No 5 648 159
   
      Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 August 2015 in Case R 2384/2013-1
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               admit this writ of claim, with all the documents annexed, and the correspondent copies;
            
         
               —
            
            
               admit all the evidences attached to this writ;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Applicant to bear the costs of the proceedings.
            
         
      Plea(s) in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               The Board of appeal has incorrectly assessed the evidence submitted by Basic AG as to its genuine use of a company names ‘Basic AG’ and ‘Basic’ use in the course of trade in Germany;
            
         
               —
            
            
               The contested decision is incorrectly based on article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009, in relation to Article 53 (1) (c), as far as between the marks ‘basic’ figuratives there is no likelihood of confusion. The term basic is lack of distinctiveness;
            
         
               —
            
            
               The exceptional protection of the German Trademark Law regarding non registered trade names has to be interpreted restrictively, according to Rome Treaty, 23 March 1957 and Community case law.