- 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 C-210/08 P: Appeal brought on 21 May 2008 by Sebirán, SL against the judgment delivered on 12 March 2008 in Case T-332/04 Sebirán, SL v OHIM and El Coto de Rioja, SA
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62008CN0210
62008CN0210
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
19.7.2008
Official Journal of the European Union
C 183/15
—
(Case C-210/08 P)
(2008/C 183/29)
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Appellant: Sebirán, SL (represented by: J. Calderón Chavero and T. Villate Consonni)
Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and El Coto de Rioja, SA
Form of order sought
—Annulment of the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 12 March 2008 in Case T-332/04 on the ground that the trade marks EL COTO/COTO DE IMAZ, on the one hand, and COTO D'ARCIS, on the other, are clearly compatible;
—Order for payment of costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Challenge to the assessment of the Court of First Instance: Sebirán considers that the Community trade mark COTO D'ARCIS does not infringe the prohibition of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 (1) since upon opposition of the proprietor of an earlier mark, in this case the Community marks EL COTO and COTO DE IMAZ, the refusal to register the most recent is not appropriate because it is sufficiently dissimilar, for the purposes of that prohibition, to the earlier marks, notwithstanding that the goods or services covered by both marks are identical or similar, considering the whole and not the separate components, when in addition there is no possibility of a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public of the whole territory of the European Union. The likelihood of confusion does not include the risk of association with the earlier mark.
* * *
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).
—