- 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-44/24: Judgment of the General Court of 2 April 2025 – Porczyńska v EUIPO – Gap (ITM) (gappol) (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark gappol – Earlier EU word mark GAP – Relative ground for invalidity – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – No limitation in consequence of acquiescence – Article 54(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 61(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 57(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Article 56(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 63(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Reimbursement of the costs of representation – Article 109(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024TA0044
62024TA0044
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 series
—
C/2025/2859
(Case T-44/24)
(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark gappol - Earlier EU word mark GAP - Relative ground for invalidity - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No limitation in consequence of acquiescence - Article 54(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 61(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 57(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Article 56(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 63(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Reimbursement of the costs of representation - Article 109(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)
(C/2025/2859)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Marzena Porczyńska (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: P. Matyjek and J. Porczyński, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Gap (ITM), Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States) (represented by: M. Siciarek, lawyer)
Re:
By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment and alteration of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 December 2023 (Case R 634/2023-5).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
Dismisses the action;
Orders Marzena Porczyńska to pay the costs.
—
OJ C C/2024/1884, 11.3.2024.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2859/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—