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
C series
—
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark RE:PLAY - Earlier EU and national marks REPLAY and earlier international registrations of the mark REPLAY - Relative ground for refusal - Unfair advantage - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)
(C/2025/2399)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Fashion Box SpA (Asolo, Italy) (represented by: A. Parassina and A. Giovannardi, 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: Ghostthinker GmbH (Augsburg, Germany) (represented by: M. Zollner and D. Breuer, lawyers)
By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 25 January 2024 (Case R 0424/2023-1).
1.The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.
2.Fashion Box SpA shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Ghostthinker GmbH.
3.The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs.
—
(1)
OJ C C/2024/3085, 13.5.2024.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2399/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—