Judgment_paragraph 33 · Les Éditions Albert René SARL v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-336/03)

33That provision restricts the examination carried out by OHIM in two ways. It relates, first, to the factual basis of decisions of OHIM, that is, the facts and evidence on which those decisions may be validly based (see, to that effect, Case T-232/00 Chef Revival USA v OHIM — Massagué Marín (Chef) [2002] ECR II-2749, paragraph 45), and, second, to the legal basis of those decisions, that is, the provisions which the jurisdiction hearing the case is obliged to apply. Thus the Board of Appeal, when hearing an appeal against a decision terminating opposition proceedings, may base its decision only on the relative grounds for refusal which the party concerned has relied on and the related facts and evidence it has presented (Case T-308/01 Henkel v OHIM — LHS (UK) (KLEENCARE) [2003] ECR II-3253, paragraph 32, and Case T-185/02 Ruiz-Picasso and Others v OHIM — DaimlerChrysler (PICARO) [2004] ECR II-1739, paragraph 28).