CELEX: 62014CA0537
Language: en
Date: 2016-10-27 00:00:00
Title: Case C-537/14 P: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 October 2016 — Debonair Trading Internacional Lda v Groupe Léa Nature SA, European Union Intellectual Property Office (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) — Figurative mark including the word elements ‘SO’BiO ētic’ — Opposition by the proprietor of the EU and national word and figurative marks including the word element ‘SO…?’ — Refusal of registration)

9.1.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 6/6
            
         Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 October 2016 — Debonair Trading Internacional Lda v Groupe Léa Nature SA, European Union Intellectual Property Office
   (Case C-537/14 P) (1)
   
   ((Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) - Figurative mark including the word elements ‘SO’BiO ētic’ - Opposition by the proprietor of the EU and national word and figurative marks including the word element ‘SO…?’ - Refusal of registration))
   (2017/C 006/06)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Debonair Trading Internacional Lda (represented by: D. Selden, Advocate, and T. Alkin, Barrister)
   
      Other party to the proceedings: Groupe Léa Nature SA (represented by: S. Arnaud, avocat), European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Gája and P. Geroulakos, acting as Agents)
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 23 September 2014, Groupe Léa Nature v OHIM — Debonair Trading Internacional (SO’BiO ētic) (T-341/13, not published, EU:T:2014:802);
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Reserves the costs.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.