- 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-456/17: Action brought on 21 July 2017 — Lupu v EUIPO — Dzhihangir (Djili soy original DS)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017TN0456
62017TN0456
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
18.9.2017
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 309/35
(Case T-456/17)
(2017/C 309/46)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Victor Lupu (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: P. Acsinte, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ibryam Dzhihangir (Silistra, Bulgaria)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word elements ‘Djili soy original DS’ — Application for registration No 8 810 558
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 03 May 2017 in Case R 516/2011-5
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—uphold the opposition against the registration of EUTMA 008404551 ‘Djili DS’ and/or to cancel the registration of EUTMA 008404551 ‘Djili DS’;
—in subsidiary, annul the Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal dated 03/05/2017 concerning the appeal R 516/2011-5 and to order the resumption of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal and further to order the Board of Appeal to maintain the suspension of its proceedings until a written, motivated and signed final decision on the appeal for annulment, docket no. 2794/1/2016, is provided to the Board of Appeal;
—order EUIPO and DZHIHANGIR Ibryam to pay the costs.
Pleas in law
—Infringement of Article 1, 1st Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights;
—Infringement of Rule 20(7)(a) and (c) of the Commission Regulation (EC) no.2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) no. 40/94 on the Community trade mark;
—Mutatis mutandis article 53(2)(c) and (d) of the Council Regulation (EC) no. 207/2009 in respect of the applicant’s copyright for the picture of the package ‘Djili’ written in red letters on a blue package with the figure of a parrot and in respect of the applicant’s rights to use a trade name for products in the sense of the Judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Case C-17/06 ‘Celine’;
—Other relevant legal provision.