- 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-64/11: Action brought on 28 January 2011 — Run2Day Franchise v OHIM — Runners Point (Run2)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011TN0064
62011TN0064
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
19.3.2011
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 89/25
(Case T-64/11)
2011/C 89/49
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Run2Day Franchise BV (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: H.J. Koenraad, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Runners Point Warenhandels GmbH (Recklinghausen, Germany)
Form of order sought
—Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 November 2010 in case R 349/2010-1;
—Order the defendant, and if applicable the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, to bear the costs of the proceedings;
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘Run2’, for goods and services in classes 18, 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 6517502
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 3800448 of the word mark ‘RUN2DAY’, for goods and services in classes 25, 28 and 35; Community trade mark registration No 3832458 of the figurative mark in colours ‘RUN2DAY’, for goods and services in classes 25, 28 and 35; Benelux trade mark registration No 811897 of the figurative mark in colours ‘RUN2DAY’, for goods and services in class 25
Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the decision of the Opposition Division and rejected the opposition
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal wrongly assessed that there was no likelihood of confusion.