EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62018CN0099
Case C-99/18 P: Appeal brought on 12 February 2018 by FTI Touristik GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 November 2017 in Case T-475/16, FTI Touristik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Case C-99/18 P: Appeal brought on 12 February 2018 by FTI Touristik GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 November 2017 in Case T-475/16, FTI Touristik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office
Case C-99/18 P: Appeal brought on 12 February 2018 by FTI Touristik GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 November 2017 in Case T-475/16, FTI Touristik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office
IO C 182, 28.5.2018, p. 8–8
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 12/02/2018
- Date lodged:
- 12/02/2018
- Author:
- An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Gearmáinis
- Type of procedure:
- Achomharc, Caingean le haghaidh neamhniú
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Request to review the judgment 62016TJ0475
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
28.5.2018 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 182/8 |
Appeal brought on 12 February 2018 by FTI Touristik GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 November 2017 in Case T-475/16, FTI Touristik GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office
(Case C-99/18 P)
(2018/C 182/07)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Appellant: FTI Touristik GmbH (represented by: A. Parr, Rechtsanwältin)
Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Harald Prantner and Daniel Giersch
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
set aside the judgment of the Eighth Chamber of the General Court of 30 November 2017 (T-475/16); |
|
— |
order EUIPO to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
Grounds of appeal and main arguments
The appellant claims that the judgment of the General Court is based on an infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. (1) The judgment is inadequately reasoned. Not all of the factual circumstances, the interplay of which is essential to the assessment of the likelihood of confusion, were taken into account. This constitutes an error of law.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1), as amended (replaced by Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (OJ 2017 L 154, p. 1)).
