Action brought on 25 October 2013 – Hostel Tourist World v OHIM – WRI Nominees (HostelTouristWorld.com)

(Case T-566/13)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Hostel Tourist World, SL (Seville, Spain) (represented by: J.M. Bartrina Díaz, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: WRI Nominees Ltd (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul OHIM’s decision in so far as it upholds the appeal lodged by WRI Nominees Ltd, concerning the cancellation or invalidity of Community trade mark No 7 241 862 HOSTELTOURISTWORLD for Classes 39 and 43 in the International Classification;

pursuant to Article 65(2) of Regulation No 207/2009, dismiss the appeal lodged by WRI Nominees Ltd in relation to the invalidity of Community trade mark No 7 241 862 ‘HOSTELTOURISTWORLD.COM’ for Classes 35, 39 and 43 in the International Classification, or, in the alternative, order OHIM to take the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of the Court delivered in accordance with the terms indicated in the application; and

order OHIM to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned, in respect of which an application for a declaration of invalidity was made: Figurative mark ‘HostelTouristWorld.com’ for services in Classes 35, 39 and 43 – Registered Community trade mark No 7 241 862

Proprietor of the mark: The applicant

Applicant for a declaration of invalidity: WRI Nominees Ltd

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, read in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) thereof, and of Article 8(4) of Regulation No 207/2009, read in conjunction with Article 53(1)(c) thereof

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Application dismissed

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal of WRI Nominees Ltd upheld in part and decision of the Cancellation Division annulled in part

Pleas in law:

Infringement of Articles 63 and 64 of Regulation No 207/2009;

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, read in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) thereof.