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
(Case T-519/22) (*)
(EU trade mark - Procedure for the revocation of decisions or the cancellation of entries - Revocation of a decision containing an obvious error attributable to EUIPO - Article 103(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No obvious error)
(2023/C 261/48)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Société des produits Nestlé SA (Vevey, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Jaeger-Lenz, A. Lambrecht, and A.-C. Salger, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: V. Ruzek, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: European Food SA (Păntășești, Romania) (represented by I. Speciac, lawyer)
By its action on the basis of Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 June 2022 (Case R 894/2020-1).
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 27 June 2022 (Case R 894/2020-1);
2.Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Société des produits Nestlé SA;
3.Orders European Food SA to bear its own costs.
*
Language of the case: English.
(*)
OJ C 398, 17.10.2022.