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 62016TN0085

    Case T-85/16: Action brought on 17 February 2016 — Shoe Branding Europe v EUIPO — adidas (Position of two parallel stripes on a shoe)

    OJ C 136, 18.4.2016, p. 39–40 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    17/02/2016
    Date lodged:
    17/02/2016
    Author:
    General Court
    Form:
    Judicial information
    Authentic language:
    English
    Type of procedure:
    Action for annulment

    18.4.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 136/39

    Action brought on 17 February 2016 — Shoe Branding Europe v EUIPO — adidas (Position of two parallel stripes on a shoe)

    (Case T-85/16)

    (2016/C 136/54)

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Shoe Branding Europe BVBA (Oudenaarde, Belgium) (represented by: J. Løje, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: adidas AG (Herzogenaurach, Germany)

    Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

    Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

    Trade mark at issue: EU position mark consisting of two parallel lines positioned on the outside surface of the upper part of a shoe — Application for registration No 10 477 701

    Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

    Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 November 2015 in Case R 3106/2014-2

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    principally:

    —

    annul the contested decision;

    —

    order EUIPO to pay the costs;

    in the alternative:

    —

    remit the case to the Defendant ordering a renewed examination independent of the judgment of the General Court in case No. T-145/14;

    in the second alternative:

    —

    remit the case to the Defendant ordering a stay of the proceedings on the outcome of the Applicant’s appeal of the General Court’s decision in case No. T-145/14 to the Court of Justice of the European Union, case No. C-396/15 P, and on delivery of a judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union in said case to conduct its own evaluation of the similarities and differences between the marks to be compared.

    Pleas in law

    —

    the Defendant erred in not making its own assessment of the similarities and differences between the Applicant’s disputed mark and the earlier mark of the Opponent registered under EU trade mark No 3 517 646;

    —

    the Defendant erred in finding that the conditions under Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 were fulfilled.
    Top