CELEX: 62008TN0303
Language: en
Date: 2008-07-30 00:00:00
Title: Case T-303/08: Action brought on 30 July 2008 — Tresplain Investments v OHIM — Hoo Hing (Golden Elephant Brand)

11.10.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 260/14
            
         Action brought on 30 July 2008 — Tresplain Investments v OHIM — Hoo Hing (Golden Elephant Brand)
   (Case T-303/08)
   (2008/C 260/26)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Tresplain Investments Ltd (Hong Kong, China) (represented by: D. McFarland, Barrister)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Hoo Hing Holdings Ltd (Romford, United Kingdom)
   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 7 May 2008 in case R 889/2007-1; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order OHIM to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   
      Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity: The figurative mark ‘Golden Elephant Brand’ for goods in class 30 — Community trade mark registration No 241 810
   
      Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant
   
      Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal
   
      Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity: The unregistered figurative mark ‘GOLDEN ELEPHANT’, which had been in use in the United Kingdom
   
      Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the decision of the Cancellation Division
   
      Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 73 and 74(1) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred by taking into account alleged facts, as well as legal presumptions and assumptions that had not been introduced or substantiated by the parties, while at the same time it refused to take into account other facts, evidence and arguments advanced by the applicant; infringement of Article 8(4) of Council Regulation 40/94 as the Board of Appeal erred in its finding that there was a likelihood of relevant confusion between the trade marks concerned and, as a result, a likelihood of damage.