- 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-816/14: Judgment of the General Court of 24 February 2016 — Tayto Group v OHIM — MIP METRO (REAL HAND COOKED) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark REAL HAND COOKED — Earlier national figurative mark real QUALITY — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Misuse of power — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Articles 64, 75, 76 and 83 of Regulation No 207/2009)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TA0816
62014TA0816
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 118/30
(Case T-816/14)(1)
((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark REAL HAND COOKED - Earlier national figurative mark real QUALITY - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Misuse of power - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Articles 64, 75, 76 and 83 of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2016/C 118/34)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Tayto Group Ltd (Corby, United Kingdom) (represented by: R. Kunze and G. Würtenberger, lawyers)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 October 2014 (Case R 842/2013-4) relating to opposition proceedings between MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG and Tayto Group Ltd.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Tayto Group Ltd to pay the costs.
OJ C 56, 16.2.2015.