Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62011TA0083

Joined Cases T-83/11 and T-84/11: Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2012 — Antrax It v OHIM — THC (Radiators for heating) (Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community designs representing thermosiphons for the purposes of radiators for heating — Earlier design — Ground for invalidity — Lack of individual character — Overall impression not different — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 — No scope for innovation — Obligation to state reasons)

OJ C 399, 22.12.2012, p. 19–19 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

22.12.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/19


Judgment of the General Court of 13 November 2012 — Antrax It v OHIM — THC (Radiators for heating)

(Joined Cases T-83/11 and T-84/11) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community designs representing thermosiphons for the purposes of radiators for heating - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Lack of individual character - Overall impression not different - Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002 - No scope for innovation - Obligation to state reasons)

2012/C 399/32

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Antrax It Srl (Resana, Italy) (represented by: L. Gazzola, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Mannucci and A. Folliard-Monguiral initially, then A. Folliard-Monguiral and F. Mattina, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: The Heating Company (THC) (Dilsen, Belgium) (represented by: J. Haber, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 November 2010 (Cases R 1451/2009-3 and R 1452/2009-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between The Heating Company (THC) and Antrax It Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Annuls the decisions of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 2 November 2010 (Cases R 1451/2009-3 and R 1452/2009-3) in so far as they declared invalid the designs Nos 000593959-0001 and 000593959-0002;

2.

Dismisses the actions as to the remainder;

3.

Orders OHIM, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay the costs incurred by Antrax It Srl in the proceedings before the General Court;

4.

Orders The Heating Company (THC), in addition to bearing its own costs before the General Court, to pay those incurred by Antrax It in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.


(1)  OJ C 113, 9.4.2011.


Top