CELEX: C2004/106/125
Language: en
Date: 2004-04-30 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the court of first instance 18 February2004 in Case T-10/03: Jean-Pierre Koubi v Office for Harmonisationin the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark— Application for Community word mark CONFORFLEX — Earlier national word andfigurative marks FLEX — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation(EC) No 40/94)

30.4.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 106/62
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
   
   18 February 2004
   in Case T-10/03: Jean-Pierre Koubi v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark CONFORFLEX - Earlier national word and figurative marks FLEX - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
   (2004/C 106/125)
   Language of the case: French
   In Case T-10/03, Jean-Pierre Koubi, residing in Marseilles (France), represented by K. Manhaeve, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Agents: S. Laitinen and S. Pétrequin); the other party to the proceedings being: Fabricas Lucia Antonio Betere, SA (Flabesa), established in Madrid (Spain), represented by I. Valdelomar, lawyer: Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 16 October 2002 (Case R 542/2001-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Koubi and Fabricas Lucia Antonio Betere, SA (Flabesa), the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) composed of: H. Legal, President, V. Tiili and M. Vilaras, Judges; B. Pastor, Deputy Registrar, has given a judgment on 18 February 2004, in which it:
   
               1.
            
            
               Dismisses the action
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 55 of 08.03.2003.