CELEX: C2006/010/37
Language: en
Date: 2006-01-14 00:00:00
Title: Case T-154/03: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of  17 November 2005  — Biofarma v OHIM (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Earlier national word marks ARTEX — Application for Community word mark ALREX — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

14.1.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 10/19
            
         Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 November 2005 — Biofarma v OHIM
   (Case T-154/03) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Earlier national word marks ARTEX - Application for Community word mark ALREX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
   (2006/C 10/37)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   Parties
   
      Applicant(s): Biofarma SA (Neuilly-sur-Seine, France) (represented by V. Gil Vega, A. Ruiz López and D. Gonzalez Maroto, lawyers)
   
      Defendant(s): Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by W. Verburg and A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agents)
   
      Other party or parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Tampa, Florida, United States) (represented by S. Klos, lawyer)
   Action
   brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 February 2003 (Case R 370/2002 3), concerning opposition proceedings between Biofarma SA and Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
   Operative part of the judgment
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 5 February 2003 (Case R 370/2002-3);
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Orders the intervener to bear its own costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 158, 5.7.2003.