# C_2019093EN.01007701.xml

| 11.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/77 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/77

---

Action brought on 23 January 2019 — Globalia Corporación Empresarial v EUIPO — Touring Club Italiano (TC Touring Club)

(Case T-44/19)

(2019/C 93/99)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Globalia Corporación Empresarial, SA (Llucmajor, Spain) (represented by: A. Gómez López, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Touring Club Italiano (Milan, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark TC Touring Club in colours red and light grey — Application for registration No 15 299 001

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 November 2018 in Case R 448/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision due to infringement of Article 95(1) and (2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, constituting a substantial procedural error; and/or |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision due to infringement of Article 95(1) and (2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, constituting a substantial procedural error; and/or

| — | set aside the contested decision due to erroneous application of Article 47(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and enter a finding to the effect that proof of ‘genuine’ use of the earlier trade mark is insufficient or inconclusive; and/or |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the contested decision due to erroneous application of Article 47(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and enter a finding to the effect that proof of ‘genuine’ use of the earlier trade mark is insufficient or inconclusive; and/or

| — | set aside the contested decision due to erroneous application of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and enter a finding to the effect that there does not exists likelihood of confusion between the confronted trade marks; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the contested decision due to erroneous application of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and enter a finding to the effect that there does not exists likelihood of confusion between the confronted trade marks;

| — | order the defendant and the intervener, if he enters an appearance in proceedings, to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant and the intervener, if he enters an appearance in proceedings, to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 95(1) and (2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 95(1) and (2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 47(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 47(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---