CELEX: 62013TN0183
Language: en
Date: 2013-03-28 00:00:00
Title: Case T-183/13: Action brought on 28 March 2013 — Skype/OHIM — British Sky Broadcasting and Sky IP International (SKYPE)

15.6.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 171/28
            
         Action brought on 28 March 2013 — Skype/OHIM — British Sky Broadcasting and Sky IP International (SKYPE)
   (Case T-183/13)
   2013/C 171/54
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Skype (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: I. Fowler, Solicitor, J. Schmitt, lawyer and J. Mellor, QC)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: British Sky Broadcasting Group plc (Isleworth, United Kingdom) and Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 January 2013 in Case R 2398/2010-4;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘SKYPE’ — Community trade mark application No 3 660 065 for services in class 38
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘SKY’ for goods and services in classes 9, 38 and 41 — Community trade mark application No 3 203 411
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.