CELEX: 62018TN0112
Language: en
Date: 2018-02-23 00:00:00
Title: Case T-112/18: Action brought on 23 February 2018 — Pink Lady America v CPVO — WAAA (Cripps Pink)

30.4.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 152/42
            
         Action brought on 23 February 2018 — Pink Lady America v CPVO — WAAA (Cripps Pink)
   (Case T-112/18)
   (2018/C 152/51)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Pink Lady America LLC (Yakima, Washington, United States) (represented by: R. Manno and S. Travaglio, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Western Australian Agriculture Authority (WAAA) (South Perth, Australia)
   
      Details of the proceedings before CPVO
   
   
      Proprietor of the Community plant variety right at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Community Plant variety right at issue: Community Plant Variety Right No EU1640, apple variety Cripps Pink
   
      Procedure before CPVO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity.
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Board of Appeal of CPVO of 14 September 2017 in Case A007/2016
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision;
            
         
               —
            
            
               annul the Cripps Pink apple tree variety CPVR No 1640 for lack of novelty according to Article 10 along with Article 20 of Regulation No 2100/94;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the CPVO and the Western Australian Agriculture Authority to bear the costs and expenses of the proceedings.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of the combined provisions of Articles 10 and 20 of Regulation No 2100/94;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Article 76 of Regulation No 2100/94 and of the general principles of law on legal certainty and sound administration of justice in conjunction with Article 50(3) of Regulation No 874/2009.