Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017TA0122

Case T-122/17: Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2018 — Devin v EUIPO — Haskovo (DEVIN) (EU trade mark – Cancellation proceeding – European Union word mark DEVIN – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Geographical name – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

OJ C 4, 7.1.2019, p. 26–26 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

7.1.2019   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/26


Judgment of the General Court of 25 October 2018 — Devin v EUIPO — Haskovo (DEVIN)

(Case T-122/17) (1)

(EU trade mark - Cancellation proceeding - European Union word mark DEVIN - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Geographical name - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2019/C 4/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Devin AD (Devin, Bulgaria) (represented by: B. Van Asbroeck, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Di Natale and D. Gája, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Haskovo Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Haskovo, Bulgaria)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2016 (Case R 579/2016-2) relating to invalidity proceedings between Devin AD and Haskovo Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 December 2016 (Case R 579/2016-2);

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

3.

Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Devin AD;

4.

Orders Haskovo Chamber of Commerce and Industry to bear its own costs.


(1)  OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.


Top