EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-699/21: Action brought on 31 October 2021 — Peace United v EUIPO — 1906 Collins (MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0699

62021TN0699

October 31, 2021
With Google you find a lot.
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

24.1.2022

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/40

(Case T-699/21)

(2022/C 37/53)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Peace United Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Artzimovitch, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: 1906 Collins LLC (Miami, Florida, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN — EU trade mark No 11 352 804

Procedure before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 July 2021 in Case R 276/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the contested decision in so far as, as a result of various errors of assessment in fact and in law, as well as a failure to fulfil the duty of good administration, the Board of Appeal found that EU trade mark No 11 352 804, MY BOYFRIEND IS OUT OF TOWN, had not been put to genuine use during the period at issue for the services claimed in Classes 41 and 43;

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Infringement of Article 63(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in that the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the abusive nature of the action for revocation;

Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in that the Board of Appeal erred in its assessment of the genuine use of the trade mark.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia