CELEX: C2001/317/22
Language: en
Date: 2001-11-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-327/01: Action brought on 31 August 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities against Ireland

10.11.2001             EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 317/13
European Communities in Joined Cases T-357/99 and                       Action brought on 31 August 2001 by the Commission
T-358/99 between Telefon & Buch VerlagsgmbH and the                             of the European Communities against Ireland
Office for Harmonisation in the Internat Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before the Court of Justice
of the European Communities on 29 August 2001 (by fax on                                         (Case C-327/01)
27 August 2001) by Telefon & Buch VerlagsgmbH, represented
by Dr Hans Georg Zeiner, Zeiner & Zeiner Chambers, Schil-                                        (2001/C 317/22)
linggasse 6, A-1010 Vienna.
                                                                        An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
                                                                        Justice of the European Communities on 31 August 2001 by
The appellant claims that the Court should:                             the Commission of the European Communities, represented
                                                                        by Mikko Huttunen, acting as agent, with an address for
                                                                        service in Luxembourg.
1.    set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
      14 June 2001 in Joined Cases T-357/99 and T-358/99
      Telefon & Buch VerlagsgmbH v Office for Harmonisation             The Applicant claims that the Court should:
      in the Internat Market;
                                                                        (1) declare that by. failing to adopt the laws, regulations
2.    declare that the words UNIVERSALTELEFONBUCH and                         or administrative provisions necessary to comply with
      UNIVERSALKOMMUNIKATIONSVERZEICHNIS                       are            Council Directive 98/20/EC (1) of 30 March 1998
      capable of comprising European Community trade marks,                   amending Directive 92/14/EEC (2) on the limitation of the
      satisfy the requirements of Article 4 of Regulation                     operation of aeroplanes covered by Part II, Chapter 2,
      No 40/94 and are not merely descriptive within the                      Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on Inter-
      meaning of Article 7(1)(c) of that regulation;                          national Civil Aviation, second edition (1988) or, in any
                                                                              event, by failing to inform the Commission of those
                                                                              measures, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under
3.    refer the case back to the Office for Harmonisation in the              that Directive;
      Internat Market for further consideration and decision,
      requiring it to follow the view as to the law of the Court
      of Justice of the European Communities;                           (2) order Ireland to pay the costs.
4.    order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internat Market
      to pay the costs of these proceedings.                            Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                        The pleas in law and main arguments are analogous to those
                                                                        in Case C-323/01 (3); the time-limit for transposition expired
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         on 1 March 1999.
                                                                        (1) OJ L 107, 7.4.1998, p. 4.
Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of                  (2) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992, p. 21.
20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (1) has been               (3) See page 12 of this Official Journal.
infringed because it was interpreted too broadly and therefore
incorrectly: the neologisms at issue here, acknowledged by the
Court of First Instance as such, cannot be signs which are
subject to a requirement of availability. It would be an
interference with the creativity of economic operators to
reserve for commercial dealings words which have not yet
been used, or have not yet been used for certain goods or
services, and therefore clearly are also not needed for such            Action brought on 31 August 2001 by the Commission
dealings; that appears untenable on the basis of Regulation                     of the European Communities against Ireland
No 40/94. If the ground for excluding protection, contained
in Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94, were interpreted as
broadly as the Court of First Instance has interpreted it in the                                 (Case C-328/01)
contested judgment, Article 12(b) of that regulation would be
superfluous.                                                                                     (2001/C 317/23)
                                                                        An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
(1) OJ L 11, 14.1.1994, p. 1.                                           Justice of the European Communities on 31 August 2001 by
                                                                        the Commission of the European Communities, represented
                                                                        by Mikko Huttunen, acting as agent, with an address for
                                                                        service in Luxembourg.