- 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-684/21: Action brought on 21 October 2021 — Mostostal v EUIPO — Polimex — Mostostal (MOSTOSTAL)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0684
62021TN0684
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
3.1.2022
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 2/43
(Case T-684/21)
(2022/C 2/60)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Mostostal S.A. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: C. Saettel, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Polimex — Mostostal S.A. (Warsaw)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court
Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark MOSTOSTAL — European Union trade mark No 9 329 848
Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 30 July 2021 in Case R 2508/2019-5
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—annul the contested decision;
—declare the European Union trade mark registered on 20 May 2011 under No 9 329 848 valid;
—order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs in accordance with Article 134(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.
Pleas in law
—Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 59(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Infringement of Article 61 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.