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-122/12: Action brought on 19 March 2012 — ActionSportGames v OHIM

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012TN0122

62012TN0122

March 19, 2012
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

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/23

(Case T-122/12)

2012/C 165/39

Language in which the application was lodged: Danish

Parties

Applicant: ActionSportGames A/S (Humlebæk, Denmark) (represented by: W. Rebernik, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: FN Herstal SA (Herstal, Belgium)

Form of order sought

Annul the defendant’s decision of 12 January 2012 in Case R 2096/2010-1;

Uphold the decision of the Opposition Division of 24 September 2010 (Case No B 1 344 904);

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: ActionSportGames A/S

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘SCAR’ for goods in Class 28 in Community trade mark application No 5 750 054.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: FN Herstal SA

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The non-registered Belgian word mark ‘SCAR’ for goods in Classes 13 and 28.

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition dismissed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Decision of the Opposition Division annulled and case referred back to that division.

Pleas in law: The applicant claims that there is no likelihood of confusion between the disputed trade marks, since the goods at issue are fundamentally different because FN Herstal’s goods are made up of proper firearms for military use, whereas the applicant’s goods are replica and toy weapons for sport and play.

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