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-402/19: Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Brillux v EUIPO — Synthesa Chemie (Freude an Farbe) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark Freude an Farbe — Earlier EU figurative mark Glemadur Freude an Farbe — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TA0402

62019TA0402

September 23, 2020
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

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/33

(Case T-402/19) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark Freude an Farbe - Earlier EU figurative mark Glemadur Freude an Farbe - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2020/C 399/47)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Brillux GmbH & Co. KG (Münster, Germany) (represented by: R. Schiffer, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Synthesa Chemie GesmbH (Perg, Austria) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2019 (Case R 1434/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Synthesa Chemie and Brillux.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.Dismisses the action;

2.Orders Brillux GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.

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