- 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 C-349/10 P: Appeal brought on 9 July 2010 by Claro, S.A. against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Fifth Chamber) on 28 April 2010 in Case T-225/09 Claro, S.A. v OHIM and Telefónica, S.A.
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0349
62010CN0349
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 234/29
—
(Case C-349/10 P)
()
2010/C 234/48
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Appellant: Claro, S.A. (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri and Castán Pérez-Gómez, abogados)
Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and Telefónica, S.A.
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should take cognisance of the appeal lodged and the supporting documents, declare the appeal against the judgment of the Fifth Chamber of the General Court of 28 April 2010 in Case T-225/09 lodged in time and in the required form and, via the appropriate procedure, and set aside the judgment under appeal and grant the form of order sought by Claro, S.A.
Grounds of appeal and main arguments
Erroneous interpretation made by the General Court of Article 59 of the Community trade mark regulation. The appeal is based on the premise that, contrary to the arguments of the General Court (and of the Board of Appeal earlier in the proceedings), the submission of the statement of the grounds for the appeal does not constitute a requirement for the admissibility of the appeal, but constitutes a mere procedural requirement. By its ground of appeal the appellant also claims that that misinterpretation on the part of the General Court (and the Board of Appeal earlier in the proceedings) entailed an infringement of the principle of continuity in terms of their functions between the various departments of OHIM, set out in Article 62(1) of Regulation No 40/94.<a id="ntc1-C_2010234EN.01002902-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2010234EN.01002902-E0001"> (<span class="super">1</span>)</a>
—
Council Regulation of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (<a href="./../../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:L:1994:011:TOC">OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1</a>).
—