Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015TA0034

Case T-34/15: Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2016 — Wolf Oil v EUIPO — SCT Lubricants (CHEMPIOIL) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark CHEMPIOIL — Earlier figurative mark CHAMPION — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion — Obligation to state reasons — Rights of the defence — Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009)

OJ C 251, 11.7.2016, 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)

11.7.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/26


Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2016 — Wolf Oil v EUIPO — SCT Lubricants (CHEMPIOIL)

(Case T-34/15) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark CHEMPIOIL - Earlier figurative mark CHAMPION - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 251/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wolf Oil Corp. (Hemiksem, Belgium) (represented by: P. Maeyaert and J. Muyldermans, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: UAB SCT Lubricants (Klaipėda, Lithuania) (represented by: S. Labesius, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 October 2014 (Case R 1596/2013-5), concerning opposition proceedings between Wolf Oil Corp. and UAB SCT Lubricants.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the action;

2.

Orders Wolf Oil Corp. to pay the costs, including those incurred by UAB SCT Lubricants for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.


(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.


Top