Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62024TN0044

Case T-44/24: Action brought on 29 January 2024 — Porczyńska v EUIPO — Gap (ITM) (gappol)

OJ C, C/2024/1884, 11.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1884/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1884/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

Series C

C/2024/1884

11.3.2024

Action brought on 29 January 2024 — Porczyńska v EUIPO — Gap (ITM) (gappol)

(Case T-44/24)

(C/2024/1884)

Language in which the application was lodged: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Marzena Porczyńska (Łódź, Poland) (represented by: P. Matyjek, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gap (ITM), Inc. (San Francisco, California, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘gappol’ — EU trade mark No 15 218 092

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2023 in Case R 634/2023-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the decisions at first and second instance in their entirety and discontinue the proceedings; or alternatively:

—

amend the contested decision by annulling the contested decision at first and second instance and dismissing the GAP application in its entirety; or alternatively:

—

annul the contested decision at first and second instance and refer the case back to EUIPO for a fresh decision at first instance;

—

irrespective of the decision on the merits, order GAP to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the costs of legal representation, to Marzena Porczyńska.

Pleas in law

—

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) and Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001;

—

Infringement of Articles 61(1), 61(3), 109(1) and 120(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001;

—

Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001 and Article 19(2) Regulation 2018/625.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1884/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

Top