Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2014:963
Date: 2014-11-18
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Finland

Judgment of the General Court of 18 November 2014 — Lumene v OHIM (THE YOUTH EXPERTS) (Case T-484/13) 1 (Community trade mark — Application for Community word mark THE YOUTH EXPERTS — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Extent of the examination to be carried out by the Board of Appeal — Examination as to the merits conditional on the admissibility of the action — First sentence of Article 59 of Regulation No 207/2009) Language of the case: English Parties Applicant: Lumene Oy (Espoo, Finland) (represented by: L. Laaksonen, lawyer) Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 June 2013 (Case R 187/2013-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign THE YOUTH EXPERTS as a Community trade mark. Operative part of the judgment The Court: Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 26 June 2013 (Case R 187/2013-2) as regards ‘[b]leaching preparations and other substances for laundry use [and] cleaning, polishing, scouring and abrasive preparations’ in Class 3 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, and ‘[s]anitary preparations for medical purposes[,] plasters, materials for dressings[,] material for stopping teeth [and] dental wax[,] disinfectants[,] preparations for destroying vermin[,] fungicides [and] herbicides’ in Class 5 of that agreement; Dismisses the action as to the remainder; Orders each party to bear its own costs. ____________ ____________ 1 OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.