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-400/20: Action brought on 29 June 2020 — El Corte Inglés v EUIPO — Rudolf Böckenholt (LLOYD’S)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020TN0400

62020TN0400

June 29, 2020
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

10.8.2020

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/37

(Case T-400/20)

(2020/C 262/50)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Rudolf Böckenholt GmbH & Co. KG (Ostbevern, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Figurative mark LLOYD’S — EU trade mark No 2 957 132

Procedure before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 April 2020 in Case R 1119/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

annul the contested decision, inasmuch as, by dismissing the appeal brought by El Corte Inglés, S.A., it upholds the decision of the Cancellation Division partially upholding application No 18 381 C for a declaration of invalidity, and upholds the partial invalidity of EU trade mark No 2 957 132 LLOYD’S (figurative) for ‘goods made of these materials (leather and imitation of leather) and not included in other classes, excluding leather used for making footwear’ in Class 18;

order the party or parties opposing this action to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

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

Contradiction with the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO in Case R 562/2006-1 of 23 October 2009.

Contradiction and lack of consistency of the decision as regards the arguments on which it is based, and infringement of Article 32(i) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430.

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