CELEX: 62011CN0334
Language: en
Date: 2011-06-29 00:00:00
Title: Case C-334/11 P: Appeal brought on 29 June 2011 by Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 14 April 2011 in Case T-466/08: Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Focus Magazin Verlag GmbH

24.9.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 282/4
            
         Appeal brought on 29 June 2011 by Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 14 April 2011 in Case T-466/08: Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Focus Magazin Verlag GmbH
   (Case C-334/11 P)
   2011/C 282/08
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Appellant: Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie (represented by: A. von Mühlendahl, J. Pagenberg, Rechtsanwälte)
   
      Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Focus Magazin Verlag GmbH
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The appellant requests the Court of Justice to decide as follows:
   
               —
            
            
               The judgment of the General Court of 14 April 2011 in Case T-466/08 an the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office of 29 July 2008 in Case R 1796/2007-1 are annulled.
            
         
               —
            
            
               The costs of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office, before the General Court and before this court shall be borne by the Office and by the Intervener.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   The Appellant claims that the contested judgment must be annulled because the General Court violated Article 43 (2) and (3) CTMR and committed legal error in deciding that in the contested case the five-year period following registration within which the earlier German mark FOCUS on which the opposition against the CTM application for ACNO FOCUS was based must be put to genuine use did not begin to run until 13 January 2004.
   The Appellant does not challenge the finding of likelihood of confusion. While the Appellant disagrees with the finding, the Appellant considers that the General Court did not commit any error of law.