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-44/24: Action brought on 29 January 2024 — Porczyńska v EUIPO — Gap (ITM) (gappol)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TN0044

62024TN0044

January 29, 2024
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

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

Series C

C/2024/1884

11.3.2024

(Case T-44/24)

(C/2024/1884)

Language in which the application was lodged: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Marzena Porczyńska (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: P. Matyjek, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gap (ITM), Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘gappol’ — EU trade mark No 15 218 092

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2023 in Case R 634/2023-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the decisions at first and second instance in their entirety and discontinue the proceedings; or alternatively:

amend the contested decision by annulling the contested decision at first and second instance and dismissing the GAP application in its entirety; or alternatively:

annul the contested decision at first and second instance and refer the case back to EUIPO for a fresh decision at first instance;

irrespective of the decision on the merits, order GAP to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs of legal representation, to Marzena Porczyńska.

Pleas in law

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001;

Infringement of Articles 61(1), 61(3), 109(1) and 120(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001;

Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001 and Article 19(2) Regulation 2018/625.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1884/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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