Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62011TN0295

    Case T-295/11: Action brought on 9 June 2011 — Duscholux Ibérica v OHIM — Duschprodukter i Skandinavien (duschy)

    SL C 238, 13.8.2011, p. 26–26 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    13.8.2011   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 238/26


    Action brought on 9 June 2011 — Duscholux Ibérica v OHIM — Duschprodukter i Skandinavien (duschy)

    (Case T-295/11)

    2011/C 238/45

    Language in which the application was lodged: English

    Parties

    Applicant: Duscholux Ibérica, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

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

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Duschprodukter i Skandinavien AB (Hisings Backa, Sweden)

    Form of order sought

    Modify the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 21 March 2011 in case R 662/2010-1;

    Subordinately, and only in the case the former claim would be rejected, annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 21 March 2011 in case R 662/2010-1;

    Order the defendant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to pay the costs.

    Pleas in law and main arguments

    Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

    Community trade mark concerned: The international figurative mark ‘duschy’, for goods in classes 11 and 20 — Community trade mark application No W927073

    Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

    Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 2116820, of the figurative mark ‘DUSCHO Harmony’, for goods in classes 6, 11 and 19

    Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially upheld the opposition

    Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision

    Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, related to the right to fair trial; infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Council Regulation No 207/2009, because the Board of Appeal disregarded facts and evidences that were submitted in due time by the applicant; and, infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, because the Board of Appeal wrongly found that there was no risk of confusion between the conflicting trademarks.


    Top