- 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 C-56/16 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 14 September 2017 — European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) v Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto, IP, Bruichladdich Distillery Co. Ltd (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(4) and Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(d) — EU word mark PORT CHARLOTTE — Application for a declaration of invalidity of that mark — Protection conferred on the earlier designations of origin ‘Porto’ and ‘Port’ under Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and under national law — Exhaustive nature of the protection conferred on those designations of origin — Article 118m of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 — Concepts of ‘use’ and ‘evocation’ of a protected designation of origin)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CA0056
62016CA0056
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
13.11.2017
Official Journal of the European Union
C 382/14
(Case C-56/16 P) (<a id="ntc1-C_2017382EN.01001401-E0001" href="#ntr1-C_2017382EN.01001401-E0001"> (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)</a>
((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(4) and Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(d) - EU word mark PORT CHARLOTTE - Application for a declaration of invalidity of that mark - Protection conferred on the earlier designations of origin ‘Porto’ and ‘Port’ under Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and under national law - Exhaustive nature of the protection conferred on those designations of origin - Article 118m of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 - Concepts of ‘use’ and ‘evocation’ of a protected designation of origin))
(2017/C 382/16)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: E. Zaera Cuadrado and O. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the appellant: European Commission (represented by B. Eggers, I. Galindo Martín, J. Samnadda and T. Scharf, acting as Agents)
Other parties to the proceedings: Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto, IP (represented by: P. Sousa e Silva, advogado), Bruichladdich Distillery Co. Ltd (represented by: S. Havard Duclos, avocate)
Intervener in support of Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto, IP: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, M. Figueiredo and A. Alves, acting as Agents)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 18 November 2015, Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto v OHIM — Bruichladdich Distillery (PORT CHARLOTTE) (T-659/14, EU:T:2015:863);
2.Dismisses the action brought by Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto IP in Case T-659/14 against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 July 2014 (Case R 946/2013-4);
3.Orders Instituto dos Vinhos do Douro e do Porto IP to pay the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Bruichladdich Distillery Co. Ltd in both sets of judicial proceedings;
4.Orders the Portuguese Republic and the European Commission to bear their own respective costs.
* * *
(<a id="ntr1-C_2017382EN.01001401-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2017382EN.01001401-E0001">*1</a> OJ C 175, 17.5.2016).