EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document C2004/273/55

Case T-168/04: Action brought on 14 May 2004 by L&D S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

OB C 273, 6.11.2004, p. 28–28 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

6.11.2004   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/28


Action brought on 14 May 2004 by L&D S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-168/04)

(2004/C 273/55)

Language of the case to be determined pursuant to Article 131(2) of the Rules of Procedure, language in which the application was submitted: German

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 14 May 2004 by L&D S.A., Huercal de Almeria (Spain), represented by M. Knospe, lawyer.

Julius Sämann Ltd., Zug (Switzerland), was also a party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul Paragraphs 1 and 3 of the operative part of the decision of the defendant Office of 15 March 2004 in Case R 326/2003-2 concerning application No 252 288 for registration of a Community trade mark;

order the defendant Office to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Applicant for Community trade mark:

The applicant.

Community trade mark sought:

The figurative mark ‘Aire Limpio’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 5 and 35 (inter alia, perfumery and essential oils, scented air fresheners and advertising) — Application No 252 288.

Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Julius Sämann Ltd.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

National and international figurative marks and figurative Community trade mark No 91 991 consisting of fir-tree shapes bearing various words and registered for goods in Class 5 (air fresheners).

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Rejection of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Partial annulment of the decision of the Opposition Division. Refusal to register in respect of goods in Classes 3 and 5

Pleas in law:

Infringement of Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94;

No similarity between the signs;

Infringement of Article 73 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.


Top