I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
(2020/C 247/31)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: MHCS (Épernay, France) (represented by: O. Vrins, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG (Neckarsulm, Germany)
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court
Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark (Colour consisting of certain shades of the colour orange) — European Union trade mark No 747 949
Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 February 2020 in Case R 2392/2018-1
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order EUIPO and the intervener to bear their own costs;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.
—Infringement of Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 26(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark and/or of Rule 1(1)(d) in conjunction with Rule 3(2), (3) and (5) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995, implementing Council Regulation (EC) No. 40/94 on the Community trade mark;
—Infringement of the general principle of the protection of legitimate expectations and the principles of legal certainty and sound administration (including the duty to state reasons);
—Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 41(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.