EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document C2006/281/55

Case T-191/04: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 13 September 2006 — MIP METRO v OHIM Tesco Stores (METRO) (Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for a figurative mark consisting of the word mark METRO — Earlier national word mark METRO — Expiry of protection of earlier national trade mark)

IO C 281, 18.11.2006, p. 32–32 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

18.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 281/32


Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 13 September 2006 — MIP METRO v OHIM Tesco Stores (METRO)

(Case T-191/04) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for a figurative mark consisting of the word mark METRO - Earlier national word mark METRO - Expiry of protection of earlier national trade mark)

(2006/C 281/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: MIP METRO Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: R. Kaase, avocat)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the Court of First Instance: Tesco Stores Ltd (Cheshunt, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 March 2004 (Case R 486/2003-1), relating to opposition proceedings between MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG and Tesco Stores Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Declares that the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 23 March 2004 (Case R 486/2003-1) is annulled;

2.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the applicant;

3.

Orders the intervener to bear its own costs.


(1)  OJ C 201, 7.8.2004.


Top