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
(Case T-287/15)(1)
((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark real - Genuine use - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Use of the mark by a third party - Article 15(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Proof of genuine use - Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 277/50)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Tayto Group Ltd (Corby, United Kingdom) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2015 (Case R 2285/2013-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Tayto Group and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Tayto Group Ltd to pay the costs.
OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.