- 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-726/21: Action brought on 10 November 2021 — Rolex v EUIPO — PWT (Device of a crown)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0726
62021TN0726
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
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 11/37
(Case T-726/21)
(2022/C 11/51)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Rolex SA (Geneva, Switzerland) (represented by: C. Sueiras Villalobos, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: PWT A/S (Aalborg, Denmark)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark (Representation of a crown) — International registration designating the European Union No 1 263 679
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 August 2021 in Case R 2389/2020-4
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs, or in the alternative (if the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal intervenes) that EUIPO and the other party do severally and jointly pay the applicant’s costs.
Pleas in law
—Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.