This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015TA0287
Case T-287/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 June 2017 — Tayto Group v EUIPO — MIP Metro (real) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark real — Genuine use — Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character — Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Use of the mark by a third party — Article 15(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Proof of genuine use — Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons)
Case T-287/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 June 2017 — Tayto Group v EUIPO — MIP Metro (real) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark real — Genuine use — Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character — Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Use of the mark by a third party — Article 15(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Proof of genuine use — Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons)
Case T-287/15: Judgment of the General Court of 28 June 2017 — Tayto Group v EUIPO — MIP Metro (real) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark real — Genuine use — Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character — Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Use of the mark by a third party — Article 15(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Proof of genuine use — Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons)
OJ C 277, 21.8.2017, p. 34–35
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
21.8.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 277/34 |
Judgment of the General Court of 28 June 2017 — Tayto Group v EUIPO — MIP Metro (real)
(Case T-287/15) (1)
((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark real - Genuine use - Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character - Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Use of the mark by a third party - Article 15(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Proof of genuine use - Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons))
(2017/C 277/50)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Tayto Group Ltd (Corby, United Kingdom) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: J.-C. Plate and R. Kaase, lawyers)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2015 (Case R 2285/2013-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Tayto Group and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders Tayto Group Ltd to pay the costs. |