- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-162/18: Action brought on 7 March 2018 — Beko v EUIPO — Acer (ALTUS)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0162
62018TN0162
With us you find everything. Try it now!
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
30.4.2018
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 152/58
(Case T-162/18)
(2018/C 152/68)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Beko plc (Watford, United Kingdom) (represented by: G. Tritton, barrister)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Acer, Inc. (Taipei City, Taiwan).
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Applicant: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark ALTUS — Application for registration No 6 490 809
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 December 2017 in Case R 1991/2016-5.
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision and remit the matter back to EUIPO to reconsider the request for suspension;
—order the suspension of the proceedings;
—order EUIPO to pay its own costs and pay the costs of the applicant.
Plea in law
—EUIPO was wrong not to grant the request for suspension of the opposition pending the outcome of the Slovakian proceedings. In particular, it is submitted that the reasoning of the Fifth Board of Appeal was manifestly flawed and/or unreasonable and/or failed to address the ‘the whole picture’ and accordingly was not in a position to weigh properly the various interests involved and/or amounted to a misuse of powers.