EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-5/10 P: Appeal brought on 6 January 2010 by Giampietro Torresan against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) delivered on 19 November 2009 in Case T-234/06 Torresan v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Klosterbrauerei Weissenohe GmbH & Co. KG

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0005

62010CN0005

January 6, 2010
With Google you find a lot.
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

13.3.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/36

(Case C-5/10 P)

2010/C 63/57

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Giampietro Torresan (represented by: G. Recher and R. Munarini, avvocati)

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Klosterbrauerei Weissenohe GmbH & Co. KG

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

set aside the judgment in Case T-234/06, Reg. No 414968, notified by fax on 19 November 2009;

uphold in their entirety the forms of order sought by Mr Torresan before the Court of First Instance (now ‘the General Court’) in Case T-234/06;

in any event, order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings in their entirety, including the costs incurred before OHIM and in the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Infringement and/or misapplication of the Community legislation concerning agriculture and foodstuffs;

Infringement and/or misapplication of the legislation on consumer protection, with regard to the notion of the average consumer;

Infringement of the language rules for proceedings;

Distortion of the facts or the evidence, all factors designed to confirm, as the sole and ultimate inference, the absolutely distinctive and non-descriptive character of the mark Cannabis, with a view to establishing the infringement or misapplication of Article 7(1)(c) of the Trade Mark Regulation (1) and the contradictory nature of the reasoning followed by the General Court in support of the finding that the mark Cannabis is descriptive. In consequence, it will be appropriate to declare that the judgment in Case T-234/06 — the judgment under appeal — is set aside in its entirety.

Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

* * *

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia