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-305/10: Action brought on 23 July 2010 — Hartmann-Lamboy v OHIM — Diptyque (DYNIQUE)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010TN0305

62010TN0305

July 23, 2010
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

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/41

(Case T-305/10)

()

(2010/C 288/80)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Marlies Hartmann-Lamboy (Westerburg, Germany) (represented by: R. Loos, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: DIPTYQUE SAS (Paris, France)

Form of order sought

Annul, in part, the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 7 May 2010 in Case R 1217/2009-1 or amend it in so far as the applicant was unsuccessful;

order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the costs of the opposition proceedings, the appeal and the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant.

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark DYNIQUE for goods and services in classes 3, 41 and 44.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: DIPTYQUE SAS

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Word mark DIPTYQUE for goods and services in classes 3, 4 and 35

Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed in part.

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) since there is no likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

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