- 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-509/19: Judgment of the General Court of 28 April 2021 — Asolo v EUIPO — Red Bull (FLÜGEL) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark FLÜGEL — Earlier national word marks … VERLEIHT FLÜGEL and RED BULL VERLEIHT FLÜÜÜGEL — Relative grounds for refusal — Damage to reputation — Article 8(5) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(5) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Article 70(2) and Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TA0509
62019TA0509
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 242/26
(Case T-509/19)
(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark FLÜGEL - Earlier national word marks … VERLEIHT FLÜGEL and RED BULL VERLEIHT FLÜÜÜGEL - Relative grounds for refusal - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(5) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Article 70(2) and Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(2021/C 242/33)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Asolo LTD (Limassol, Cyprus) (represented by: W. Pors and N. Dorenbosch, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Red Bull GmbH (Fuschl am See, Austria) (represented by: A. Renck and S. Petivlasova, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2019 (Case R 201/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Red Bull and Asolo.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Asolo LTD to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 295, 2.9.2019.