CELEX: C2006/281/58
Language: en
Date: 2006-11-18 00:00:00
Title: Case T-6/05: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 September 2006 — DEF-TEC Defense Technology v OHIM — Defense Technology (FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for figurative mark FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Existence of trade mark proprietor's consent)

18.11.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 281/34
            
         Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 September 2006 — DEF-TEC Defense Technology v OHIM — Defense Technology (FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR)
   (Case T-6/05) (1)
   
   (Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative mark FIRST DEFENSE AEROSOL PEPPER PROJECTOR - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Existence of trade mark proprietor's consent)
   (2006/C 281/58)
   Language of the case: English
   Parties
   
      Applicant: DEF-TEC Defense Technology GmbH (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: H. Daniel, lawyer)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: D. Botis, Agent)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Defense Technology Corporation of America (Jacksonville, Florida) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)
   Re:
   Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 November 2004 (Case R 493/2002-2), relating to opposition proceedings between DEF-TEC Defense Technology GmbH and Defense Technology Corporation of America
   Operative part of the judgment
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 8 November 2004 (Case R 493/2002 2);
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and the costs of the applicant, except those relating to the intervention;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Orders the applicant to bear the costs relating to the intervention;
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Orders the intervener to bear its own costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 82, 2.4.2005.