- 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
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 22 October 2010. # Longevity Health Products Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). # Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Word sign 'Kids Vits' - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community word mark VITS4KIDS - Level of attention of the relevant public - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Right to be heard. # Case C-84/10 P.
ECLI:EU:C:2010:628
62010CO0084
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
(Case C‑84/10 P)
Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 8(1)(b) – Word sign ‘Kids Vits’ – Opposition by the proprietor of the Community word mark VITS4KIDS – Level of attention of the relevant public – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Right to be heard
3. Appeals – Grounds – Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 256(1), TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 30)
Re:
Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 9 December 2009 in Case T-484/08 Longevity Health Products v OHIM – Merck (Kids Vits), by which that court dismissed the action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 August 2008, refusing the registration of the word sign ‘Kids Vits’ as a Community trade mark for certain goods in Class 5, by upholding the opposition by the proprietor of the earlier Community word mark ‘VITS4KIDS’ – Breach of the right to a judicial hearing – Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Likelihood of confusion between two marks.
Operative part
1.The appeal is dismissed.
2.Longevity Health Products, Inc. is ordered to pay the costs.