Information;Order — ECLI:EU:T:2021:725
Date: 2021-10-20
Language of the case: English
Court formation: President of the Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment;Application for interim measures - unfounded
Origin: Spain

Action brought on 14 August 2021 – Girardi v EUIPO (Case T-497/21) Language of the case: English Parties Applicant: Giovanna Paola Girardi (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: G. Macías Bonilla, lawyer) Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) Form of order sought The applicant claims that the Court should: annul the notification issued on 14 June 2021 by the Operations Department in the procedure 50057C and in all other files where the applicant/right holder has its registered address outside the European Union, by which the Applicant cannot represent clients whose registered domicile is outside of the European Union ; declare the change of practice introduced in the EUIPO’s Guidelines in respect of the professional representation of Spanish lawyers before the EUIPO (Annex 1, Section 5, Part A) illegal ; order the European Union Intellectual Property Office to pay the costs of the proceedings. Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law. First plea in law, alleging the infringement of the Treaties, as the EUIPO has violated the principles of legal certainty, of legitimate expectations, of proportionality and of non-discrimination by notifying to the applicant an irregularity in the power to act as a representative before the EUIPO on the grounds that in Spain, “abogados” can only represent clients whose permanent place of residence is in the European Union and clients whose permanent residence is outside the European Union must be represented by a professional representative holding the title “Agente Oficial de la Propiedad Industrial”. Second plea in law, alleging the infringement of Article 120 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.1 Third plea in law, alleging the lack of competence of the EUIPO to deprive Spanish lawyers of a right that exists since 1996 to fully and unconditionally practice before the EUIPO. ____________ 1 Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the European Union trade mark (EC) (OJ 2017 L 154, p. 1).