This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014TN0541
Case T-541/14: Action brought on 18 April 2014 — Antica Azienda Agricola Vitivinicola Dei Conti Leone De Castris v OHIM — Vicente Gandía Pla (ILLIRIA)
Case T-541/14: Action brought on 18 April 2014 — Antica Azienda Agricola Vitivinicola Dei Conti Leone De Castris v OHIM — Vicente Gandía Pla (ILLIRIA)
Case T-541/14: Action brought on 18 April 2014 — Antica Azienda Agricola Vitivinicola Dei Conti Leone De Castris v OHIM — Vicente Gandía Pla (ILLIRIA)
OJ C 303, 8.9.2014, p. 56–57
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
8.9.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 303/56 |
Action brought on 18 April 2014 — Antica Azienda Agricola Vitivinicola Dei Conti Leone De Castris v OHIM — Vicente Gandía Pla (ILLIRIA)
(Case T-541/14)
2014/C 303/67
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Antica Azienda Agricola Vitivinicola Dei Conti Leone De Castris Srl (Salice Salentino, Italy) (represented by: D. Russo, lawyer)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Vicente Gandía Pla SA (Chiva, Spain)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 21 May 2014 given in Case R 917/2013-4; |
|
— |
Award the applicant the costs of proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark containing the verbal elements ‘ILLIRIA’ for ‘wines’ in Class 33 — Community trade mark application No 1 0 5 99 033
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No. 8 2 99 653
Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition
Decision of the Board of Appeal: annulled the contested decision and upheld the opposition
Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR.