Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013CN0412

    Case C-412/13 P: Appeal brought on 19 July 2013 by Franz Wilhelm Langguth Erben GmbH & Co. KG against the judgment delivered on 20 February 2013 in Case T-378/11 Franz Wilhelm Langguth Erben GmbH & Co. KG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

    OJ C 298, 12.10.2013, p. 3–3 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
    OJ C 298, 12.10.2013, p. 2–3 (HR)

    12.10.2013   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 298/3


    Appeal brought on 19 July 2013 by Franz Wilhelm Langguth Erben GmbH & Co. KG against the judgment delivered on 20 February 2013 in Case T-378/11 Franz Wilhelm Langguth Erben GmbH & Co. KG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

    (Case C-412/13 P)

    2013/C 298/04

    Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Appellant: Franz Wilhelm Langguth Erben GmbH & Co. KG (represented by: R. Kunze and G Würtenberger, Rechtsanwälte)

    Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)(OHIM)

    Forms of order sought

    The Appellant claims that the Court should:

    set aside the judgment of the General Court of 20 February, dismissing an action against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 May 2011 (Case R-1598/2010-4) relating to a claim of seniority of earlier marks;

    order OHIM to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    The appeal is brought against the judgment of the General Court dismissing the Appellant’s claim for annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 10 May 2011 relating to a claim of seniority of earlier marks in an application for registration of the figurative sign MEDINET as a Community trade mark.

    The General Court infringed Article 34 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark by holding that that provision was to be interpreted narrowly and did not allow the seniority of part of an earlier national mark to be claimed. It further infringed its duty to state reasons under Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009, in that it came to its decision on the basis of incomplete factual and legal considerations. Finally, the decision of the General Court without an oral procedure constituted a breach of Article 77 of Regulation No 207/2009.


    Top