Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62006TA0149

    Case T-149/06: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 November 2007 — Castellani v OHIM — Markant Handels und Service (CASTELLANI) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the figurative Community trade mark CASTELLANI — Earlier national word marks CASTELLUM and CASTELLUCA — Relative ground of refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

    OJ C 8, 12.1.2008, p. 14–15 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    12.1.2008   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 8/14


    Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 20 November 2007 — Castellani v OHIM — Markant Handels und Service (CASTELLANI)

    (Case T-149/06) (1)

    (Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the figurative Community trade mark CASTELLANI - Earlier national word marks CASTELLUM and CASTELLUCA - Relative ground of refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

    (2008/C 8/27)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Castellani SpA (Campagna Gello, Italy) (represented by: A. Di Maso and M. Di Maso, lawyers)

    Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. García Murillo, agent)

    The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Markant Handels und Service GmbH (Offenburg, Germany)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 February 2006 (Case R 449/2005-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Markant Handels und Service GmbH and Castellani SpA.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 22 February 2006 (Case R 449/2005 1);

    2.

    Orders OHIM to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 178, 29.7.2006.


    Top