CELEX: C2003/101/70
Language: en
Date: 2003-04-26 00:00:00
Title: Case T-39/03: Action brought on 7 February 2003 by DaimlerChrysler AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

C 101/38               EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                         26.4.2003
Finally, the applicant alleges breach of the principle of non-             compensation for the material damage he allegedly suffered in
discrimination in that the contested decisions deprived the                the period between 1 July and 31 December 2001 and has
union of which the applicant is the secretary general of all               made the present application. In support of his arguments, he
manner of human and material resources without taking                      alleges infringement of the abovementioned article of the Staff
account of its representativeness.                                         Regulations.
Action brought on 31 January 2003 by José Pedro                            Action brought on 7 February 2003 by DaimlerChrysler
Pessoa e Costa against Commission of the European                          AG against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
                           Communities                                                   Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
                                                                                                     (Case T-39/03)
                          (Case T-36/03)
                                                                                                    (2003/C 101/70)
                         (2003/C 101/69)
                                                                           (Language of the case: to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2)
                    (Language of the case: French)                         of the Rules of Procedure — Language in which the application was
                                                                                                   submitted: German)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                 An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
European Communities on 31 January 2003 by José Pedro                      Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the
Pessoa e Costa, residing in Brussels, represented by Albert                Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis et Étienne Marchal, lawyers, with an               7 February 2003 by DaimlerChrysler AG, Stuttgart, Germany,
address for service in Luxembourg.                                         represented by M. Trimborn, lawyer. AXON Leasing GmbH,
                                                                           Grasbrunn, Germany, was also a party to the proceedings
                                                                           before the Board of Appeal.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     declare that the Commission commited an administrative               The applicant claims that the Court should:
      fault by not reinstating the applicant to the first vacancy
      at Grade A 5 commensurate with his abilities;                        —     annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of
                                                                                 4 November 2002 in appeal No R 329/2001-4 and
—     order the Commission to reconstitute his career and, in                    dismiss the appeal;
      particular, to pay him the remuneration to which he is
      entitled in respect of the period from 1 August to                   —     order the defendant Office to pay the costs.
      31 December 2001 together with default interest calcu-
      lated at the rate of 1.5 % per annum;
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.                                Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                           Applicant for Com-             The applicant
                                                                           munity trade mark:
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                           Community trade mark           The word mark ‘AXOR’ for goods
                                                                           sought:                        and services in Classes 12 and 37
The applicant, an official working for the defendant, on leave                                            (automobiles and parts therefor
on personal grounds until 30 June 2001, requested his                                                     (included in Class 12) and motor
reinstatement, in accordance with Article 40(4)(d) of the Staff                                           vehicle maintenance and repair)
Regulations of officials of the European Communities. On                                                  — application No 1111061
30 May 2002, the applicant lodged a complaint claiming that
the defendant had failed to reinstate him to the first vacancy             Proprietor of mark or          AXON Leasing GmbH
corresponding to his grade and abilities. The applicant claims             sign cited in the oppo-
that that complaint was partially rejected so far as concerns              sition proceedings:
 ---pagebreak--- 26.4.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                          C 101/39
Mark or sign cited in          The German word/figurative                  Pleas in law and main arguments
opposition:                    mark ‘AXON’ (No 1108589) for
                               goods and services in classes 10,           Applicant for Com-           Applicant
                               12, 35 and 36                               munity trade mark:
Decision of the Oppo-          Rejection of the opposition                 Community trade mark         Figurative mark ‘Julián Murúa
sition Division:                                                           sought:                      Entrena’        —       Application
                                                                                                        No 62.588 for products in
Decision of the Board of       Annulment of the decision of the                                         Class 33 (wines).
Appeal:                        Opposition Division and referral
                               of the case back to the Opposition          Proprietor of mark or        Bodegas Murúa S.A.
                               Division                                    sign cited in the oppo-
                                                                           sition proceedings:
Pleas in law:                  —     There is no similarity
                                     between the marks opposed,            Mark or sign cited in        Spanish trade mark ‘MURUA’
                                     within the meaning of                 opposition:                  and international registration
                                     Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation                                      No 482.779 having effect in Ger-
                                     (EC) No 40/94 (1).                                                 many, France, Austria, Switzer-
                                                                                                        land and Benelux for products in
                               —     There is no likelihood of                                          Class 33.
                                     confusion.
                                                                           Decision of the Oppo-        Opposition accepted.
                                                                           sition Division:
( 1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the
     Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).                            Decision of the Board of     Appeal dismissed.
                                                                           Appeal:
                                                                           Pleas in law:                Incorrect        application      of
                                                                                                        Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC)
                                                                                                        No 40/94 (likelihood of con-
                                                                                                        fusion).
Action brought on 10 February 2003 by Julián Murúa
Entrena against the Office for Harmonisation in the
     Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
                          (Case T-40/03)                                   Action brought on 10 February 2003 by La Maison de
                                                                           l’Europe Avignon-Méditerranée against Commission of
                                                                                            the European Communities
                         (2003/C 101/71)
                                                                                                    (Case T-43/03)
                   (Language of the case: Spanish)
                                                                                                   (2003/C 101/72)
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal                               (Language of the case: French)
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) was brought before
the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
10 February 2003 by Julián Murúa Entrena, residing in El
Ciego, Álava (Spain), represented by Ignacio Temiño Ceniceros,             An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
lawyer.                                                                    ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                           European Communities on 10 February 2003 by La Maison
                                                                           de l’Europe Avignon-Méditerranée, established in Avignon
                                                                           (France), represented by François Martineau, lawyer.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—      annul the contested decision refusing the Community                 The applicant claims that the Court should:
       trade-mark application No 62.588 in Class 33;
                                                                           —     order the defendant to pay EUR 100 000 to make good
—      order the parties to bear their own costs and half of the                 the damage suffered by La Maison de l’Europe Avignon-
       common costs.                                                             Méditerranée as a result of the disclosure of deceitful,