This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2006/281/58
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)
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)
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)
SL C 281, 18.11.2006, p. 34–34
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
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. |