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-286/21: Action brought on 21 May 2021 — Pejovič v EUIPO — ETA živilska industrija (RENŠKI HRAM)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0286

62021TN0286

May 21, 2021
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

12.7.2021

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/64

(Case T-286/21)

(2021/C 278/87)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Edvin Pejovič (Pobegi, Slovenia) (represented by: U. Pogačnik, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: ETA živilska industrija d.o.o. (Kamnik, Slovenia)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark RENŠKI HRAM — European Union trade mark No 15 297 302

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 March 2021 in Case R 679/2020-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

uphold the present application;

reform the contested decision in such manner to uphold the applicant’s appeal and reform the decision issued in cancellation procedure No 26 907 C of 17 March 2020 in such manner, to uphold the application for a declaration of invalidity of the contested trade mark RENŠKI HRAM and to declare the contested trade mark invalid in its entirety;

in the alternative, annul the contested decision;

remit the case back to the EUIPO for further deliberation;

order EUIPO to pay all costs.

Pleas in law

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

Infringement of Article 63(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 46(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

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