NEWModern Legal Agent: describe your case, get an answer backed by case law and a draft filing.
Try it for free
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-393/12: Action brought on 4 September 2012 — Tsujimoto v OHIM — Kenzo (KENZO)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012TN0393

62012TN0393

September 4, 2012

17.11.2012

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/32

(Case T-393/12)

2012/C 355/67

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Kenzo Tsujimoto (Osaka, Japan) (represented by: A. Wenninger-Lenz, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kenzo SA (Paris, France)

Form of order sought

—Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 May 2012 in case R 1659/2011-2; and

—Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘KENZO’, for goods in class 33 — Community trade mark application No 6334544

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 720706 for the word mark ‘KENZO’, for goods and services in classes 3, 18 and 25

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision and rejected the CTM application in its entirety

Pleas in law:

—Infringement of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation No 40/94; and

—Infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Council Regulation No 40/94.

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