Orders nº T-453/05 of Court of First Instance of the European Communities, June 26, 2006

• Resolution Date: June 26, 2006
• Issuing Organization: Court of First Instance of the European Communities
• Decision Number: T-453/05

(Community trade mark – Representation by a lawyer – Manifest inadmissibility)

In Case T-453/05,

Vonage Holdings Corporation, established in Edison (USA), represented by J. Kääriäinen,

applicant,

v

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM),

defendant,

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 October 2005 (Case R 510/2005-1) concerning an application for registration of the word mark REDEFINING COMMUNICATIONS as a Community trade mark,

THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCEOF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (Second Chamber),

composed of: J. Pirrung, President, A.W.H. Meij and I. Pelikánová, Judges,

Registrar: E. Coulon,

makes the following

Order

Facts and procedure

1 By application lodged at the Registry of the Court of First Instance on 27 December 2005, the applicant brought an action against the decision of 20 October 2005 of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) (Case R 510/2005-1).

2 The application states that the applicant is represented by J. Kääriäinen, lawyer. The application is signed by J. Kääriäinen.

3 On 3 January 2006 the Court of First Instance, pursuant to Article 44(6) of its Rules of Procedure, requested J. Kääriäinen to lodge evidence that, as required by Article 19 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, he is authorised to practise as a lawyer before a court of a Member State. In response to this request, Mr Kääriäinen lodged on 24 January 2006 a certificate by J.-O. Brännström, a Judge of the Malmö District Court (Sweden), dated 10 April 2002, that J. Kääriäinen ‘is a lawyer and entitled to represent clients and to alone appear in all [c]ourts in Sweden’.

4 Considering that this answer was not satisfactory, the Court requested J. Kääriäinen to produce evidence that he is admitted to the Bar as an ‘advokat’ within the meaning of Swedish legislation, or that he is authorised to practise, as a lawyer, before a court of another Member State or of another State which is a party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 19 of the Statute of the Court of Justice. The time-limit set out for answering that request expired on 10 April 2006.

5 On 10 April 2006, J. Kääriäinen explained that he is not admitted to the Sveriges Advokatsamfund (Swedish Bar Association) as an ‘advokat’, due to the fact that he is working at a firm specialising in patent law and...