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-658/18: Action brought on 31 October 2018 — Hästens Sängar v EUIPO (Representation of a pattern of squares)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018TN0658

62018TN0658

October 31, 2018
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

21.1.2019

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/46

(Case T-658/18)

(2019/C 25/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hästens Sängar AB (Köping, Sweden) (represented by: M. Johansson and R. Wessman, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark in colours blue and white (Representation of a pattern of squares) — Application for registration No 1 340 047

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 August 2018 in Case R 442/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the contested decision;

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Infringement of Article 94 and Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the grounds that the Board of Appeal has not made a proper examination, and/or has failed to state the reasons for its decision in relation to the different goods and services applied for;

Infringement of Article 94, Article 95 and Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the grounds that the subject trade mark is not a repeated pattern or a three-dimensional mark;

Erroneous assessment of the relevant underlying public interest constituting infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council since the Board of Appeal has made an incorrect assessment as regards inherent distinctiveness.

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