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-322/13: Action brought on 14 June 2013 — Tsujimoto/OHIM — Kenzo (KENZO)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013TN0322

62013TN0322

June 14, 2013
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

31.8.2013

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/31

(Case T-322/13)

2013/C 252/51

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Kenzo Tsujimoto (Osaka, Japon) (represented by: A. Wenninger-Lenz, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kenzo (Paris, 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 (Trademarks and Designs) of 25 March 2013 (Case R 1364/2012-2);

Order OHIM to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘KENZO’, for services in classes 35, 41 and 43 — Community trade mark application No 8 701 286

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark of the word mark ‘KENZO’, for goods in classes 3, 18 and 25

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision and rejected the CTM application in its entirety

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 76(2) and 8(5) of CTMR.

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