- 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-636/21: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — Eurol v EUIPO — Pernsteiner (eurol LUBRICANTS) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark eurol LUBRICANTS — Earlier national word mark EUROLLUBRICANTS — Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark — Articles 15 and 57 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18 and 64 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Use with the trade mark proprietor’s consent — No alteration of distinctive character — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TA0636
62021TA0636
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 63/43
(Case T-636/21) (*)
(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark eurol LUBRICANTS - Earlier national word mark EUROLLUBRICANTS - Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark - Articles 15 and 57 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Articles 18 and 64 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Use with the trade mark proprietor’s consent - No alteration of distinctive character - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(2023/C 63/54)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Eurol BV (Nijverdal, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Driessen and G. van Roeyen, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: August Wolfgang Pernsteiner (Feldkirchen an der Donau, Austria) (represented by: J. Öhlböck, lawyer)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 July 2021 (Case R 2403/2020-2).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Eurol BV to pay the costs.
(*) Language of the case: English.
(1) OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.