CELEX: 62011TN0605
Language: en
Date: 2011-11-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-605/11: Action brought on 29 November 2011 — Novartis v OHIM — Organic (BIOCERT)

4.2.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 32/31
            
         Action brought on 29 November 2011 — Novartis v OHIM — Organic (BIOCERT)
   (Case T-605/11)
   2012/C 32/65
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Novartis AG (Basel, Switzerland) (represented by: M. Douglas, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Dr. Organic Ltd (Swansea, United Kingdom)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 September 2011 in case R 1030/2010-4; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘BIOCERT’, for goods and services in classes 3, 4, 5, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35 and 44 — Community trade mark application No 7134984
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Austrian trade mark registration No 136273 of the word mark ‘BIOCEF’, for goods in class 5
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 76(1) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal: (i) misinterpreted general principles laid down by the European courts and wrongly concluded that there is no likelihood of confusion between ‘BIOCEF’ and ‘BIOCERT’; and (ii) wrongly based its decision on facts which have not been forwarded by the parties of the proceedings.