Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

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
You are here

Document 62008TN0450

Case T-450/08: Action brought on 6 October 2008 — Coverpla v OHIM — Heinz-Glas (design)

SL C 6, 10.1.2009, p. 34–34 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

10.1.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/34

Action brought on 6 October 2008 — Coverpla v OHIM — Heinz-Glas (design)

(Case T-450/08)

(2009/C 6/69)

Language in which the application was lodged: French

Parties

Applicant: Coverpla (Nice, France) (represented by: P. Greffe and M. Chaminade, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Heinz-Glas GmbH (Kleintettau, Germany)

Form of order sought

—

Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of 7 July 2008 (Case R 1411/2007-3) in so far as it dismissed the applicant's appeal and declared the Community design ‘Tour’ No 29178-0002 invalid;

—

declare Community design ‘Tour’ No 29178-0002 in class 09-01 valid.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Community design No 29178/0002 for ‘phials’

Proprietor of the Community design: The applicant

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Heinz-Glas GmbH

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: An unregistered phial named ‘Empire’ (reference number F 3990)

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declaration of invalidity of the Community design

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: The Community design does have the requisite novelty; the documents which Heinz-Glas GmbH submitted to show that it disclosed to the public a prior design of an identical phial have no evidential value.

Top