- 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-345/16: Action brought on 27 June 2016 — Blackmore v EUIPO — Paice (DEEP PURPLE)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016TN0345
62016TN0345
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
29.8.2016
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 314/29
(Case T-345/16)
(2016/C 314/40)
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Richard Hugh Blackmore (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: A. Edwards-Stuart, Barrister)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ian Paice (London, United Kingdom)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘DEEP PURPLE’ — Application for registration No 11 772 721
Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 in Case R 880/2015-5
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—overturn the contested decision and allow the appeal;
—order EUIPO to pay the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal.
Pleas in law
—The Board of Appeal erred in admitting the evidence filed on 5 November 2014;
—The Board of Appeal erred in finding that there was sufficient evidence of goodwill on the basis of the evidence filed in time;
—The Board of Appeal erred in holding that the evidence was sufficient to establish that the Opponent is entitled to a share in any goodwill.