EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CN0624
Case C-624/11 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Brighton Collectibles, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 27 September 2011 in Case T-403/10 Brighton Collectibles v OHIM — Felmar
Case C-624/11 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Brighton Collectibles, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 27 September 2011 in Case T-403/10 Brighton Collectibles v OHIM — Felmar
Case C-624/11 P: Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Brighton Collectibles, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 27 September 2011 in Case T-403/10 Brighton Collectibles v OHIM — Felmar
SL C 133, 5.5.2012, p. 15–15
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
5.5.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 133/15 |
Appeal brought on 6 December 2011 by Brighton Collectibles, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 27 September 2011 in Case T-403/10 Brighton Collectibles v OHIM — Felmar
(Case C-624/11 P)
2012/C 133/27
Language of the case: French
Parties
Appellant: Brighton Collectibles, Inc. (represented by: J. Horn, avocat)
Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and Felmar
Form of order sought
|
— |
Set aside the judgment of the General Court in Case T-403/10; |
|
— |
Order OHIM to bear its own costs and those of the appellant; |
|
— |
Order Felmar to bear its own costs if it intervenes in the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
By the present appeal, the appellant claims that the General Court failed to make a valid assessment of the evidence the appellant submitted to it and failed to give sufficient reasons for its decision with regard to the national laws relied upon, in particular, Irish and UK case-law relating to passing off. Consequently, the General Court infringed the provisions of Article 8(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark. (1)