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-583/19: Action brought on 23 August 2019 – Electrolux Home Products v EUIPO – D. Consult (FRIGIDAIRE)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019TN0583

62019TN0583

August 23, 2019
With Google you find a lot.
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

14.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/18

(Case T-583/19)

(2019/C 348/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Electrolux Home Products, Inc. (Charlotte, North Carolina, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: D. Consult (Wattignies, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark FRIGIDAIRE - European Union trade mark registration No 71 241

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 June 2019 in Case R 166/2018-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the contested decision;

annul the decision of the Cancellation Division of 23 November 2017 in Cancellation No 11921 C to revoke the European Union trade mark in relation to clothes dryers, washing machines, dishwashers and ranges;

maintain the European Union trade mark registered in respect of clothes dryers, washing machines, dishwashers and ranges;

order the defendant to bear its own costs and pay those of the applicant.

Pleas in law

The Board wrongly applied the law in finding that the use of the European Union trade mark as evidenced by sales of clothes dryers, washing machines, dishwashers and ranges by the applicant to US military bases in Germany and Belgium did not amount to use of the European Union trade mark for the purposes of Article 58 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

The Board wrongly applied Article 58 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by failing to take account of the applicant's evidence of use in the form of sales to Johann Fouquet GmbH when considering the totality of the applicant's use of the European Union trade mark in relation to the clothes dryers, washing machines, dishwashers and ranges;

The Board wrongly applied Article 58 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by failing to take account of the Applicant's evidence of use in the form of use on social media when considering the totality of the Applicant's use of the EUTM in relation to clothes dryers, washing machines, dishwashers and ranges.

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