Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62018TA0443

    Case T-443/18: Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Peek & Cloppenburg v EUIPO — Peek & Cloppenburg (Vogue Peek & Cloppenburg) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark Vogue Peek & Cloppenburg — Earlier national commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Coexistence of the national commercial designation and the mark applied for — Demarcation agreement — Application of national law by EUIPO — Suspension of the administrative proceedings — Article 70 of Regulation 2017/1001 — Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) — Manifest error of assessment)

    IO C 215, 29.6.2020, p. 29–30 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    29.6.2020   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 215/29


    Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Peek & Cloppenburg v EUIPO — Peek & Cloppenburg (Vogue Peek & Cloppenburg)

    (Case T-443/18) (1)

    (EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Vogue Peek & Cloppenburg - Earlier national commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Coexistence of the national commercial designation and the mark applied for - Demarcation agreement - Application of national law by EUIPO - Suspension of the administrative proceedings - Article 70 of Regulation 2017/1001 - Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) - Manifest error of assessment)

    (2020/C 215/35)

    Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: P. Lange, lawyer)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Hanf, acting as Agent)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: A. Renck, M. Petersenn and C. Stöber, lawyers)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 April 2018 (Case R 1362/2005-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg) and Peek & Cloppenburg (Düsseldorf).

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Dismisses the action;

    2.

    Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf) to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 311, 3.9.2018.


    Top