Manually operated portable electric power tools
GvEA, 15 mei 2007, gevoegde zaken T-239/05, T-0240/05, T-245/05 t/m T-247/05, T-255/05, T274/05 t/m T-280/05, The Black & Decker Corporation tegen OHIM/ Atlas Copco AB. (Nog geen Nederlandse versie beschikbaar).
Dertien Oppositiezaken. Black & Decker deponeert dertien Gemeenschapsmerken: zwart-geel gekleurde beeld-, vorm en kleurmerken met betrekking tot (de vorm van) gereedschap voor waren van klasse 7, draagbare elektrische handgereedschappen, enz. (afbeelding CTM 000541607).
Atlas Copco Aktiebolag stelt dertien keer oppositie in. De dertien opposities worden aanvankelijk afgewezen, omdat de opposities onvoldoende duidelijk zouden zijn. De Kamer van Beroep van het OHIM is het daar niet mee eens en wijst de dertien zaken terug voor nadere afhandeling.
Black & Decker komt tegen deze beslissing in beroep bij het GvEA en stelt dat de opposities toch echt niet-ontvankelijk had moeten worden verklaard, aangezien de in de opposities aangevoerde oudere merken en tekens onvoldoende duidelijk waren aangegeven, althans te laat waren overgelegd. Het Gerecht stelt dat dat laatste de opposant in deze zaak niet kan worden verweten en dat de opposities ook verder voldoende duidelijk waren.
Over de vermeende ontijdige indiening van de opposities stelt het Gerecht:
56- In this case, it is common ground that the 13 notices of opposition concerned were sent to OHIM by fax and received in black and white before the expiry of the opposition period thus laid down, and that the original colour versions of the notices of opposition were transmitted by post and that they were received by OHIM after the expiry of the opposition period.
58- Under Rule 80(2) of the implementing regulation, where a communication received by fax is incomplete or illegible, or where OHIM has reasonable doubts as to the accuracy of the transmission, OHIM is to inform the sender accordingly and is to invite him, within a period to be specified by OHIM, to retransmit the original by fax or to submit the original in accordance with Rule 79(a).
62- It must be held that it would be contrary to the objective pursued by that rule for the sender of a document transmitted by fax which is incomplete and who therefore submits the originals without waiting for the invitation from OHIM, to be treated more severely than the sender of a document by fax who communicates the originals only after an invitation from OHIM.
63 - To deprive the sender who acts without OHIM’s invitation of the benefit of Rule 80(2) of the implementing regulation would amount to penalising the latter for his diligence. Such an interpretation of the rule must be regarded as contrary to the intention of the legislature.
66- Since the documents were received between two and four days after the expiry of the opposition period, it must be held that the intervener acted promptly as regards the second attempt at communication for the purpose of Rule 80(2) of the implementing regulation.
67- It follows from all of the foregoing, that the original versions of the notices of opposition must be deemed to have arrived on the dates they were faxed as set out in paragraph 13 above. Therefore, they are deemed to have been received at OHIM before the expiry of the opposition period and are thus admissible.
En over de vermeende onduidelijkheid van de opposities, en dan vooral waar het de aanduiding van de oudere merken betreft, stelt het Gerecht vrij duidelijk dat er met de identificatie van de oudere merken weinig mis is.
69- By the second ground of challenge, which is also common to all of the cases, the applicant submits that the Board of Appeal incorrectly considered the earlier trade marks and signs on which the intervener’s opposition was based to be clearly identified. In particular, the Board of Appeal wrongly held that the fact that a number of models were identified by their reference number and also by their specifications, in tabular form, was an aid to the applicant in identifying the earlier rights.
102- It follows from all of the foregoing that, for the purposes of Rule 18(1) of the implementing regulation as a condition of admissibility for the oppositions, the information contained in the notices of opposition and, in particular, the depiction of electric power tools in colour, accompanied in certain cases by the reference numbers of the models, constitute a sufficiently clear identification of the earlier trade marks and signs on which the oppositions are based.
De opposities zijn derhalve formeel in orde en het verzoek van Black & Deckerom de opposities niet-ontvankelijk te verklaren wordt dertien maal afgewezen.
Lees het arrest hier.
