- 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-187/19: Action brought on 29 March 2019 — Glaxo Group v EUIPO (colour mark purple)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0187
62019TN0187
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 172/45
(Case T-187/19)
(2019/C 172/59)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Glaxo Group Ltd (Brentford, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, QC, S. Baran, Barrister and R. Jacob, Solicitor)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union colour mark purple (PANTONE: 2587C) — Application for registration No 14 596 951
Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 January 2019 in Case R 1870/2017-1
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs.
Pleas in law
—Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by finding that the sign lacked inherent distinctive character so that it could not validly be registered as a trade mark;
—Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by failing to find that the sign had acquired distinctiveness through the use made of it by the applicant for annulment and/or with its authorisation.