- 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-625/13: Action brought on 25 November 2013 — The Tea Board v OHIM — Delta Lingerie (Darjeeling collection de lingerie)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013TN0625
62013TN0625
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
15.2.2014
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 45/37
(Case T-625/13)
2014/C 45/65
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: The Tea Board (Calcutta, India) (represented by: A. Nordemann, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Delta Lingerie (Cachan, France)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 17 September 2013 given in Case R 1502/2012-2;
—Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark claiming the colour green containing the verbal element ‘Darjeeling collection de lingerie’ for Classes 25, 35 and 38 — the Community trade mark application No 9 466 228
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community collective trade mark registration No 4 325 718 of the word mark ‘DARJEELING’ for goods in Class 30; Community collective trade mark registration No 8 674 327 of the figurative mark containing the verbal element ‘DARJEELING’
Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) CTMR.