CELEX: 62012TN0131
Language: en
Date: 2012-03-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-131/12: Action brought on 23 March 2012 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — Orly International (SPARITUAL)

9.6.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 165/24
            
         Action brought on 23 March 2012 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — Orly International (SPARITUAL)
   (Case T-131/12)
   2012/C 165/41
   Language in which the application was lodged: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Spa Monopole compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV (Spa, Belgium) (represented by: L. De Brouwer, E. Cornu and É. De Gryse, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Orly International, Inc (Van Nuys, USA)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 9 January 2012 in Case R 2396/2010-1;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘SPARITUAL’ for goods in Class 3 — Community trade mark applied for No 3631884
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Benelux registrations of the word marks ‘SPA’ and ‘Les Thermes de Spa’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 32 and 42
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the application for a Community trade mark
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the contested decision and rejection of the opposition
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 in the assessment of the reputation of the word mark ‘SPA’ in Class 32 and infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 in the assessment of the likelihood that unfair advantage would be taken of the repute of the mark ‘SPA’.