- 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-353/18: Action brought on 28 May 2018 — Promeco v EUIPO — Aerts (dishes)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0353
62018TN0353
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
(Case T-353/18)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Promeco NV (Kortrijk, Belgium) (represented by: H. Hartwig and A. von Mühlendahl, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aerts NV (Geel, Belgium)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Design at issue: European Union design No 218 193-0010
Contested decision: Decision of the Grand Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 February 2018 in Case R 459/2016-G
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—dismiss the appeal brought by Aerts NV against the decision of the EUIPO’s Invalidity Division of 8 January 2016, case ICD 9842;
—order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred by the Applicant before the Grand Board of Appeal;
—order Aerts NV, in case it intervenes in this case, to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred by the Applicant before the Grand Board of Appeal.
Plea in law
—Infringement of Article 25(1) in conjunction with Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.