- 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-557/08: Judgment of the General Court of 7 July 2010 — mPAY24 GmbH v OHIM — Ultra (M PAY) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark M PAY — Earlier Community and national word marks MPAY24 — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008TA0557
62008TA0557
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
14.8.2010
Official Journal of the European Union
C 221/41
(Case T-557/08) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark M PAY - Earlier Community and national word marks MPAY24 - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
2010/C 221/66
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: mPAY24 GmbH (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: H-G. Zeiner, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Ultra d.o.o. Proizvodnja elektronskih naprav (Zagorje ob Savi, Slovenia)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2008 (Case R 221/2007-1) relating to opposition proceedings between mPAY24 GmbH and Ultra d.o.o. Proizvodnja elektronskih naprav.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 September 2008 (Case R 221/2007-1) in so far as that decision dismissed the opposition brought by mPAY24 GmbH;
2.Orders OHIM to pay the costs.
(<span class="note">1</span>) OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.