This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2007/211/50
Case C-320/07 P: Appeal brought on 11 July 2007 by Antartica Srl against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 10 May 2007 in Case T-47/06: Antartica Srl v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and Designs)
Case C-320/07 P: Appeal brought on 11 July 2007 by Antartica Srl against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 10 May 2007 in Case T-47/06: Antartica Srl v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and Designs)
Case C-320/07 P: Appeal brought on 11 July 2007 by Antartica Srl against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 10 May 2007 in Case T-47/06: Antartica Srl v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and Designs)
SL C 211, 8.9.2007, p. 27–27
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
8.9.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 211/27 |
Appeal brought on 11 July 2007 by Antartica Srl against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 10 May 2007 in Case T-47/06: Antartica Srl v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and Designs)
(Case C-320/07 P)
(2007/C 211/50)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: Antartica Srl (represented by: E. Racca, avvocati and A. Fusillo, avvocato)
Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.
Form of order sought
The appellant claim that the Court should:
|
— |
annul the decision by the Second Board of Appeal |
|
— |
order the defendant to pay costs |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The appellant submits that the Court of First Instance's interpretation of Article 8 (5) of Regulation 40/94 (1) is inconsistent with the current definition of trademark notoriety subsequent to case C-372/97 General Motors.
(1) OJ L 11, p. 1.