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-346/23: Action brought on 22 June 2023 — Finastra International v EUIPO — Fenestrae (FINASTRA)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TN0346

62023TN0346

June 22, 2023
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

7.8.2023

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/28

(Case T-346/23)

(2023/C 278/39)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Finastra International Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Fenestrae BV (‘s-Gravenhage, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the European Union word mark FINASTRA — International registration designating the European Union No 1 405 804

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 April 2023 in Case R 1296/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the contested decision;

order EUIPO (and the intervener, should it take part in these proceedings) to bear its own costs and pay the costs of the applicant for annulment before this Court and before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

Wrong interpretation of the specified goods & services;

Misidentification of the relevant public;

Failing to apply the rule of conceptual counteraction as regards a specialised public.

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