This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62007TA0067
Case T-67/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 December 2008 — Ford Motor v OHIM (FUN) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark FUN — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Case T-67/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 December 2008 — Ford Motor v OHIM (FUN) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark FUN — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
Case T-67/07: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 December 2008 — Ford Motor v OHIM (FUN) (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark FUN — Absolute grounds for refusal — Lack of descriptive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
OJ C 19, 24.1.2009, p. 26–27
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
24.1.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 19/26 |
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 2 December 2008 — Ford Motor v OHIM (FUN)
(Case T-67/07) (1)
(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark FUN - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)
(2009/C 19/49)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Ford Motor Co. (Dearborn, Michigan, United States) (represented by: R. Ingerl, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Poch, Agent)
Re:
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 December 2006 (Case R 1135/2006-2), concerning an application for registration of the Community word mark FUN.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 20 December 2006 (Case R 1135/2006 2); |
|
2. |
Orders OHIM to pay the costs. |