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 62021TN0344

Case T-344/21: Action brought on 23 June 2021 — Plusmusic v EUIPO — Groupe Canal + (+music)

OJ C 329, 16.8.2021, pp. 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)

16.8.2021   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/34

Action brought on 23 June 2021 — Plusmusic v EUIPO — Groupe Canal + (+music)

(Case T-344/21)

(2021/C 329/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Plusmusic AG (Dietikon, Suisse) (represented by: M. Maier and A. Spieß, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Groupe Canal + (Issy-les-Moulineaux, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark +music — Application for registration No 17 482 571

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 April 2021 in Case R 1236/2020-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

partially annul the contested decision insofar as it confirms the other party’s opposition on the basis of Article 8(1)(b) EURMR;

—

order EUIPO and the other party to bear their own costs and pay those of the Applicant.

Pleas in law

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by erroneously assessing the visual comparison of the signs;

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by erroneously assessing the distinctiveness of the earlier cross device marks;

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council by erroneously assessing the likelihood of confusion.
Top