do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case T-435/17: Action brought on 30 March 2017 — Grendene v EUIPO — Hipanema (HIPANEMA)
Date: 2017-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, precious metal, precious stones, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017283EN.01005401.xml










28.8.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 283/54





Action brought on 30 March 2017 — Grendene v EUIPO — Hipanema (HIPANEMA)
(Case T-435/17)
(2017/C 283/83)
Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties


Applicant: Grendene (Sobral, Brazil) (represented by: J. L. de Castro Hermida, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Hipanema (Paris, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO


Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘HIPANEMA’ — International registration designating the European Union No 1 154 586

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20/01/2017 in Case R 629/2016-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


annul the contested decision and replace it with a decision recognising the affinity between the goods covered by the mark applied for and those protected by the opponent’s earlier marks, to the extent necessary in order to acknowledge a similarity between those goods within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 207/2009 on the European Union trade mark;










—


once that similarity between the goods is acknowledged, compare the signs at issue from a verbal perspective, which was not done either during the opposition proceedings or during the administrative action, conclude that the signs at issue are identical phonetically and aurally and similar graphically, hold that peaceful coexistence between the marks at issue is impossible and, lastly, reject the application for protection in the European Union of international trademark No 1 154 586 ‘HIPANEMA’, Class 14. Or, if the General Court does not have jurisdiction to do so, remit the question to the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office, subject to the requirement that it acknowledge the similarity between the marks at issue.





Plea in law







—


Infringement of Article 8(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.
Case T-209/16: Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2017 — Apax Partners UK v EUIPO — Apax Partners Midmarket (APAX PARTNERS) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Application for the EU word mark APAX PARTNERS — Earlier international word mark APAX — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the services — Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-03-30
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, consultancy, financial services, insurance, real estate business, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017151EN.01003501.xml










15.5.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 151/35





Judgment of the General Court of 30 March 2017 — Apax Partners UK v EUIPO — Apax Partners Midmarket (APAX PARTNERS)
(Case T-209/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Application for the EU word mark APAX PARTNERS - Earlier international word mark APAX - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the services - Article 8(1)(b) and Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))
(2017/C 151/45)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Apax Partners UK Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Rose and J. Warner, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Apax Partners Midmarket (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Joly, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 February 2016 (Case R 1611/2014-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Apax Partners Midmarket and Apax Partners UK.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Apax Partners UK Ltd to pay the costs, including those necessarily incurred by Apax Partners Midmarket for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).






(1)  OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.
Case C-489/16: Order of the President of the Court of 30 March 2017 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, supported by: French Republic
Date: 2017-03-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: provision of services, rail transport, transport company, transport infrastructure, transport licence








C_2017202EN.01001302.xml










26.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 202/13





Order of the President of the Court of 30 March 2017 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, supported by: French Republic
(Case C-489/16) (1)

(2017/C 202/21)
Language of the case: French
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 410, 7.11.2016.
Case C-11/17: Order of the President of the Court of 30 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Aue, Zweigstelle Stollberg — Germany) — Thomas Hübner v LVM Lebensversicherungs AG
Date: 2017-03-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: consumer protection, life assurance, pension scheme, termination of a contract








C_2017202EN.01001402.xml










26.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 202/14





Order of the President of the Court of 30 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Aue, Zweigstelle Stollberg — Germany) — Thomas Hübner v LVM Lebensversicherungs AG
(Case C-11/17) (1)

(2017/C 202/25)
Language of the case: German
The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.


(1)  OJ C 112, 10.4.2017.
Special Report No 3/2017 — ‘EU Assistance to Tunisia’
Date: 2017-03-30
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU aid, European neighbourhood policy, Tunisia, democratisation, economic development, economic situation, economic stabilisation, financial aid, international cooperation, macroeconomics








C_2017099EN.01000501.xml










30.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 99/5





Special Report No 3/2017
‘EU Assistance to Tunisia’
(2017/C 99/04)
The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 3/2017 ‘EU Assistance to Tunisia’ has just been published.
The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu or on EU Bookshop: https://bookshop.europa.eu