CELEX: 62014TN0567
Language: en
Date: 2014-08-01 00:00:00
Title: Case T-567/14: Action brought on 1 August 2014  — Group OOD v OHIM — Kosta Iliev (GROUP Company TOURISM & TRAVEL)

20.10.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 372/18
            
         Action brought on 1 August 2014 — Group OOD v OHIM — Kosta Iliev (GROUP Company TOURISM & TRAVEL)
   (Case T-567/14)
   2014/C 372/23
   Language of the case: Bulgarian
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Group OOD (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: Dragia Dragiev and Andrey Andreev, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kosta Iliev (Sofia, Bulgaria) (represented by: Zlatarevi Patent and Trade Mark Bureau)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul Decision R 1587/2013-4 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 June 2014 on the basis of Article 65(3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM and, in the case of its intervention in the proceedings before the Court, the party concerned to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: Kosta Iliev.
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The figurative Community trade mark with the word elements ‘GROUP Company TOURISM & TRAVEL’ for goods and services in classes 35, 39 and 43.
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Group OOD.
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: unregistered trade mark comprising substantive rights over a sign with the word elements ‘Group company’.
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition.
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal as unfounded.
   
      Pleas in law:
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (the content of the Bulgarian law was incorrectly examined of the Board’s own motion);
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 76(2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (there was no comprehensive and correct evaluation of the evidence submitted);
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (the evidence submitted and legal arguments were not examined in relation to the conditions laid down in that provision).