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 62010TN0140

    Case T-140/10: Action brought on 26 March 2010 — Hans Günter Söns v OHIM — Settimio (GREAT CHINA WALL)

    SL C 148, 5.6.2010, p. 39–40 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    5.6.2010   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 148/39

    Action brought on 26 March 2010 — Hans Günter Söns v OHIM — Settimio (GREAT CHINA WALL)

    (Case T-140/10)

    2010/C 148/66

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Hans Günter Söns (Wehr, Germany) (represented by: M. Schwabe, lawyer)

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

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Alfredo Settimio (Los Angeles, United States)

    Form of order sought

    —

    Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 26 January 2010 in case R 281/2009-1;

    —

    Order the defendant to declare invalid the registered Community trade mark subject of the application for invalidity; and

    —

    Order the defendant to bear the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for invalidity: The word mark “GREAT CHINA WALL” for goods in classes 18, 24 and 25

    Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

    Party requesting the revocation of the Community trade mark: The applicant

    Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

    Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(c) and (g) of Council Regulation No 207/2009 as the Board of Appeal wrongly applied the legal provisions in question; infringement of international agreements concerning the protection of geographical indications.

    Top