Order — ECLI:EU:C:2014:270
Date: 2014-04-10
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Spain

Appeal brought on 1 July 2013 by Metropolis Inmobiliarias y Restauraciones, SL against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 25 April 2013 in Case T-284/11: Metropolis Inmobiliarias y Restauraciones, SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (Case C-374/13 P) Language of the case: English Parties Appellant: Metropolis Inmobiliarias y Restauraciones, SL (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, abogado) Otherparties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG Form of order sought The appellant claims that the Court should: Set aside the decision of the General Court of 25 April 2013 in case T-284/11, granting in consequence the registration of the Community Trademark Application n° 7.112.113 “METROINVEST” to distinguish services in class 36. Order the other parties to bear the costs of the procedure. Pleas in law and main arguments The Appellant raises a single plea alleging the: Infringement of the Art. 8.1 b) of Regulation no 207/20091 However this plea consists of four parts, which are the following: Error on the part of the General Court and on the part of OHIM in assessing the comparison of the signs. The General Court has not taken into account the applicable case law regarding the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion. Lack of coherence with other Office resolutions in which the same parts, and related trademarks are involved. Pacific coexistence between other trademarks, which include the word METRO in different classes, and also in class 36. ____________ 1 Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark OJ L 78, p. 1