- 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-21/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 25 March 2009 — L’Oréal v OHIM — Spa Monopole (SPALINE) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark SPALINE — Earlier national word mark SPA — Relative ground for refusal — Damage to reputation — Unfair advantage derived from the reputation of the earlier mark — Use of the mark applied for without due cause — Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62007TA0021
62007TA0021
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
16.5.2009
Official Journal of the European Union
C 113/33
(Case T-21/07)
(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark SPALINE - Earlier national word mark SPA - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Unfair advantage derived from the reputation of the earlier mark - Use of the mark applied for without due cause - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
2009/C 113/67
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: L’Oréal SA (Paris, France) (represented by: E. Baud, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the Court of First Instance: Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV (Spa, Belgium) (represented by: E. Cornu, L. De Brouwer, D. Moreau and E. De Gryse, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 October 2006 (Case R 415/2005-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV and L’Oréal SA.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders L’Oréal SA to pay the costs.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 69, 24.3.2007.