Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62016TN0774

    Case T-774/16: Action brought on 7 November 2016 — Consejo Regulador del Cava v EUIPO — Cave de Tain L'Hermitage, union des propriétaires (CAVE DE TAIN)

    OJ C 6, 9.1.2017, p. 50–51 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    9.1.2017   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 6/50

    Action brought on 7 November 2016 — Consejo Regulador del Cava v EUIPO — Cave de Tain L'Hermitage, union des propriétaires (CAVE DE TAIN)

    (Case T-774/16)

    (2017/C 006/63)

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Consejo Regulador del Cava (Villafranca del Penedès, Spain) (represented by: C. Prat, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cave de Tain L'Hermitage, union des proprietaires (Tain L'Hermitage, France)

    Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

    Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

    Trade mark at issue: EU word figurative mark in colours containing the word elements ‘CAVE DE TAIN’ – EU trade mark No 11 345 824

    Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

    Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2016 in Case R 980/2015-4

    Form of order sought

    The applicant claims that the Court should:

    —

    annul the contested decision in so far as it does not invalidate the Contested EUTM with regard to ‘sparkling wines with a registered designation of origin’;

    —

    order EUIPO to pay the costs.

    Plea in law

    —

    Infringement of Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 in relation to Articles 102(1)(b) and 103(2)(b) of Regulation No 1308/2013.
    Top