CELEX: C1999/246/76
Language: en
Date: 1999-08-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-136/99: Action brought on 1 June 1999 by Taurus-Film GmbH & Co. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

C 246/38                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     28.8.1999
Decision           contested    Refusal of registration by the             Decision        contested     Refusal of registration by the
before the Board of             examiner                                   before the Board of           examiner
Appeal:                                                                    Appeal:
Grounds for action:             — Infringement          of    Article      Grounds for action:           — Infringement of Article 7(1)(b)
                                    7(1)(b)of Regulation (EC) No                                             of Regulation (EC) No 40/94
                                    40/94                                                                — Misapplication of Article
                                — Misapplication of Article                                                  7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No
                                    7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No                                            40/94.
                                    40/94.
Action brought on 1 June 1999 by Taurus-Film GmbH &                        Action brought on 3 June 1999 by Natalia Martinez
Co. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal                   Paramo and Others against the Commission of the Euro-
               Market (Trade Marks and Designs)                                                  pean Communities
                          (Case T-136/99)                                                          (Case T-137/99)
                          (1999/C 246/76)                                                          (1999/C 246/77)
                    (Language of the case: German)                                            (Language of the case: French)
An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the                    An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 1                   ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
June 1999 by Taurus-Film GmbH & Co., whose registered                      European Communities on 3 June 1999 by Natalia Martinez
office is in Unterföhring (Germany), represented by Büsing,                Paramo and 33 Others, represented by Eric Boigelot, of the
Muffelmann & Theye, Rechtsanwälte, Bremen, with an address                 Brussels Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Loesch and                    Chambers of Louis Schiltz, 2 Rue du Fort Rheinsheim.
Wolter, 11 Rue Goethe.
                                                                           The applicants claim that the Court should:
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                           — annul the decision of Roger Fry, the head of unit DG IX,
1. Set aside the defendant’s decision of 19 March 1999 and                     sent to the applicants on 23 March 1999 and giving them
    order the defendant:                                                       notice of the termination of their contracts as of 30 June
                                                                               1999, and declare void the expiry date of 30 June 1999
    (a) to permit registration of Community trade mark                         fixed for each applicant’s contract;
         application No 400481 in respect of all provisions of
         services of Classes 38, 41 and 42 for which registration          — annul, in so far as is necessary, the legal characterisation of
         is still refused (as shown in the index in Annex K 2);                the applicants’ contracts, in that each applicant’s contract
         and                                                                   is in fact a renewal for an unlimited period of a contract
                                                                               awarded under Article 2(a) of the conditions of employ-
    (b) refund the appeal fee to the applicant.                                ment of other servants (hereinafter ‘the conditions’);
2. Order the defendant to pay the costs of the current dispute             — order the defendant to pay the costs.
    and the necessary expenses of the applicant for the
    procedure before the Board of Appeal.
                                                                           Pleas in law and main arguments
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                           The applicants, who have already brought an action for the
Trade mark:                     Word ‘Cine Comedy’ — Appli-                annulment of the procedures and tests for the internal
                                cation No 404053                           competitions COM/T/A/2/98 and COM/T/B/2/98 (1), now chal-
                                                                           lenge the termination on 30 June 1999 of their contracts as
Goods or services:              ‘Parts of the services in Classes 38,      temporary staff, notified to them by letter of the head of unit
                                41, 42’                                    DG IX of 23 March 1999.