- 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-147/19: Action brought on 6 March 2019 — Flovax v EUIPO — Dagniaux and Gervais Danone (GLACIER DAGNIAUX DEPUIS 1923)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0147
62019TN0147
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
29.4.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 148/62
(Case T-147/19)
(2019/C 148/62)
Language in which the application was lodged: French
Parties
Applicant: Flovax Sàrl (Doncols, Luxembourg) (represented by: C.-S. Marchiani, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Dagniaux (Roubaix, France), Compagnie Gervais Danone (Paris, France)
Details of the proceedings before EUIPO
Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal, Compagnie Gervais Danone
Trade mark at issue: EU figurative colour mark GLACIER DAGNIAUX DEPUIS 1923 ‘Text and paint: Pantone blue no 302; background Pantone no 1205c (cream)’ — EU trade mark No 896 480
Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings
Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 May 2018 in Case R 2210/2016-1 and R 2211/2016-1
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—alter the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office of 18 May 2018 in Cases R 2210/2016-1 and R 2211/2016-1;
—declare admissible appeal R 2211/2016-1 lodged by FLOVAX before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office;
—annul Cancellation Division Decision No 10417 C taken on the basis of Article 55(1) of the EU trade mark regulation, following the application for revocation registered on 22 October 2015 by Compagnie Gervais Danone, rejecting in its entirety that application for revocation;
—order Compagnie Gervais Danone to pay to the proprietor of the mark the cancellation fee and representation costs, set out on the basis of the maximum rate indicated in Article 94 of the EU trade mark regulation.
Pleas in law
—Infringement of Article 70 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
—Breach of the principle of audi alteram partem;
—Error of law in the Board of Appeal’s assessment of the conditions for establishing inadmissibility in the action before it.