25.3.2019

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/22

—

(Case C-783/18 P)

(2019/C 112/27)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

—set aside the judgment under appeal;

—order Wajos GmbH to pay the costs incurred by EUIPO.

Pleas in law and main arguments

EUIPO submits that the judgment under appeal infringes Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009. (1) The Court applied an incorrect test in the assessment of the distinctiveness of the mark at issue, did not examine the relevant criteria and relied on incorrect assessment criteria.

The judgment under appeal also infringes Article 36 and the first paragraph of Article 53 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, since it allows neither the appellant nor the Court of Justice to understand the grounds on which the General Court came to conclusion — which was decisive as regards the operative part of the judgment — that the form of the mark at issue had ‘an exceptional nature, in view of the customs of the sector’.

—

Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

—

* * *