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
(Case T-611/11)(1)
((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark Manea Spa - Earlier Benelux word and figurative marks SPA and earlier Benelux word mark LES THERMES DE SPA - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2015/C 146/46)
Language of the case: French
Applicant: Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV (Spa, Belgium) (represented by: L. De Brouwer, E. Cornu and E. De Gryse, lawyers)
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, intervener before the General Court: South Pacific Management (Papeete, Tahiti, France) (represented by: S. de La Marnierre and E. Landon, lawyers)
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 September 2011 (joined Cases R 1176/2010-1 and R 1886/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV and South Pacific Management.
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 8 September 2011 (joined Cases R 1176/2010-1 and R 1886/2010-1);
2.Orders OHIM and South Pacific Management to each bear their own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV.
OJ C 32, 4.2.2012.