Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016TA0177

    Case T-177/16: Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2019 — Mema v CPVO (Braeburn 78 (11078)) (New varieties of plants — Application for a Community plant variety right for the plant variety Braeburn 78 (11078) — Designation of another examination office — Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal — Obligation to state reasons)

    OJ C 103, 18.3.2019, p. 22–22 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    18.3.2019   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 103/22


    Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2019 — Mema v CPVO (Braeburn 78 (11078))

    (Case T-177/16) (1)

    ((New varieties of plants - Application for a Community plant variety right for the plant variety Braeburn 78 (11078) - Designation of another examination office - Scope of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal - Obligation to state reasons))

    (2019/C 103/27)

    Language of the case: German.

    Parties

    Applicant: Mema GmbH LG (Terlan, Italy) (represented by B. Breitinger and S. Kirschstein-Freund, lawyers)

    Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) (represented by M. Ekvad, F. Mattina, O. Lamberti and U. Braun-Mlodecka, acting as Agents, and A. von Mühlendahl and H. Hartwig, lawyers)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the Board of Appeal of the CPVO of 15 December 2015 (Case A 001/2015) concerning an application for a Community plant variety right for the plant variety Braeburn 78

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Annuls the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) of 15 December 2015 (Case A 001/2015) concerning an application for a Community plant variety right for the plant variety Braeburn 78;

    2.

    Dismisses the remainder of the action;

    3.

    Orders the CPVO to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.


    Top