Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 28 September 2016 — Pinto Eliseu Baptista Lopes Canhoto v EUIPO — University College London (CITRUS SATURDAY)

(Case T‑400/15)

‛EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark CITRUS SATURDAY — Earlier national word mark CITRUS — Late submission of documents — Discretion conferred by Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Rule 19 and Rule 20(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95’

| 1. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Form of appeal and period within which it must be brought — Pleading setting out the grounds lodged within the period prescribed — Condition for admissibility (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 72(2); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rules 19(1), 20(1), 70(2), 72, 80(2), and 98) (see paras 22-25) |

| 2. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeal against a decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO — Examination by the Board of Appeal — Scope — Facts and evidence not produced in support of the opposition within the period prescribed for that purpose — Account taken — Discretion of the Board of Appeal (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 76(2); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 19(2)(a)(ii), and (3)) (see paras 28-31, 36) |

| 3. | Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Identification of the subject-matter of the dispute — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Unambiguous wording of the form of order sought by the applicant (Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21, first para., and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(d)) (see paras 42, 43) |

| 4. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Boards of Appeal — Classification as administration of the Office — Right of the parties to a fair ‘process’ — None (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 61 to 64) (see para. 47) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 April 2015 (Case R 2109/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Ms Pinto Eliseu Baptista Lopes Canhoto and University College London.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Ana Isabel Pinto Eliseu Baptista Lopes Canhoto to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)