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.

Joined Cases T-83/11 and T-84/11: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2012 — Antrax It v OHIM — THC (Radiators for heating) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community designs representing thermosiphons for the purposes of radiators for heating — Earlier design — Ground for invalidity — Lack of individual character — Overall impression not different — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — No scope for innovation — Obligation to state reasons)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TA0083

62011TA0083

November 13, 2012
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

22.12.2012

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/19

(Joined Cases T-83/11 and T-84/11) (<span class="super">1</span>)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community designs representing thermosiphons for the purposes of radiators for heating - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Overall impression not different - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - No scope for innovation - Obligation to state reasons)

2012/C 399/32

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Antrax It Srl (Resana, Italy) (represented by: L. Gazzola, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Mannucci and A. Folliard-Monguiral initially, then A. Folliard-Monguiral and F. Mattina, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: The Heating Company (THC) (Dilsen, Belgium) (represented by: J. Haber, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 November 2010 (Cases R 1451/2009-3 and R 1452/2009-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between The Heating Company (THC) and Antrax It Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.Annuls the decisions of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 2 November 2010 (Cases R 1451/2009-3 and R 1452/2009-3) in so far as they declared invalid the designs Nos 000593959-0001 and 000593959-0002;

2.Dismisses the actions as to the remainder;

3.Orders OHIM, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay the costs incurred by Antrax It Srl in the proceedings before the General Court;

4.Orders The Heating Company (THC), in addition to bearing its own costs before the General Court, to pay those incurred by Antrax It in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 113, 9.4.2011.

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