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
(Case T-581/13)(1)
((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Royal County of Berkshire POLO CLUB - Earlier Community figurative trade marks BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Duty to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2015/C 155/29)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: The Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Maitland-Walker, Solicitor)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, Agents)
The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Lifestyle Equities CV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by D. Russo, lawyer)
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 July 2013 (Case R 1374/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Lifestyle Equities CV and Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd.
The Court:
1.Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) of 25 July 2013 (Case R 1374/2012-2) to the extent that it refused Community trade mark application No 9642621 in respect of ‘whips, harness, and saddlery’;
2.Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.Orders each party to bear its own costs.
OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.