# C_2017309EN.01004001.xml

| 18.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/40

---

Action brought on 3 August 2017 — Ghost — Corporate Management v EUIPO (Dry zone)

(Case T-488/17)

(2017/C 309/53)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Ghost — Corporate Management SA (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: S. de Barros Araújo, advogada)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Word mark ‘Dry zone’ — Application for registration No 15 498 322

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 June 2017 in Case R 0683/2017-2

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | uphold the present appeal and consequently annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 5 June 2017 in its entirety and consequently substitute the contested decision with one which holds that Case No R 683/2017-2, EUTM No 015498322 Dry Zone was filed in good time, so that the action may be pursued accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

—

uphold the present appeal and consequently annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of 5 June 2017 in its entirety and consequently substitute the contested decision with one which holds that Case No R 683/2017-2, EUTM No 015498322 Dry Zone was filed in good time, so that the action may be pursued accordingly.

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | First plea: infringement of Article 60 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009, L 78, p. 1) and Article 72(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (JO 1995, L 303, p. 1), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OJ 2015, L 341, p. 21); |
| --- | --- |

—

First plea: infringement of Article 60 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009, L 78, p. 1) and Article 72(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (JO 1995, L 303, p. 1), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OJ 2015, L 341, p. 21);

| — | second plea: failure to observe the procedural safeguards to which the appellant is entitled, by not establishing the existence of facts which are not under the control of the applicant or which amount to an incidence of force majeure, in breach of the principle of proportionality; |
| --- | --- |

—

second plea: failure to observe the procedural safeguards to which the appellant is entitled, by not establishing the existence of facts which are not under the control of the applicant or which amount to an incidence of force majeure, in breach of the principle of proportionality;

force majeure

| — | third plea: infringement of the principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and of legal certainty. |
| --- | --- |

—

third plea: infringement of the principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and of legal certainty.

---