Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 September 2019 — Camomilla v EUIPO

(Case C‑68/19 P)

(Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — Word mark CAMOMILLA — Rejection in part of the application for a declaration of invalidity)

| 1. | EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Examination of the application — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 51(1)(a))  (see para. 3) |

| 2. | Appeal — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted  (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.)  (see para. 3) |

| 3. | Appeal — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted — Plea alleging distortion of the facts — Need to indicate precisely the evidence alleged to have been distorted and show the errors of appraisal which led to that distortion  (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 168(1)(d))  (see para. 3) |

| 4. | Appeal — Grounds — Error of law relied on not identified — Manifest inadmissibility  (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 168(1)(d) and 169(2))  (see para. 3) |

Operative part

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded. |

| 2. | Camomilla Srl shall pay its own costs. |

[Top](#document1)