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 C-43/15 P: Appeal brought on 4 February 2015 by BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 December 2014 in Case T-595/13 BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015CN0043

62015CN0043

February 4, 2015
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

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/13

(Case C-43/15 P)

(2015/C 146/20)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: BSH Bosch und Siemens Hausgeräte GmbH (represented by: S. Biagosch, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

set aside the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 December 2014 in Case T-595/13;

annul the decisions of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 September 2013 and 3 December 2013 (Case R 1176/2012-1);

in the alternative,

refer the case back to the General Court for judgment;

order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs of the proceedings at both instances.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The present appeal has been brought against the judgment of the General Court by which that court dismissed the action brought by the appellant against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 September 2013 in opposition proceedings R 1176/2012-1.

The appellant relies upon two grounds of appeal:

First, it alleges an infringement of Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1), in that the General Court failed to observe the fact that the Board of Appeal was not allowed to vary the decision of the Opposition Division to the detriment of the appellant, since no admissible complaint had been brought by the respondent and Article 8(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal does not provide for cross-appeals.

Second, the appellant relies on an infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009. Where an earlier trade mark presents an easily recognisable alteration of a descriptive indication and the more recent trade mark itself contains that descriptive indication, even a high degree of similarity of the signs and identity of the goods cannot lead to a finding of a likelihood of confusion if the similarities of the signs are limited to the descriptive indication and relate only to goods which are described by that indication.

Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

* * *

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