CELEX: 62015TN0432
Language: en
Date: 2015-07-31 00:00:00
Title: Case T-432/15: Action brought on 31 July 2015 — Inditex v OHIM — Ffauf (ZARA)

28.9.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 320/39
            
         Action brought on 31 July 2015 — Inditex v OHIM — Ffauf (ZARA)
   (Case T-432/15)
   (2015/C 320/57)
   Language in which the application was lodged: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex) (Arteixo, Spain) (represented by: G. Macias Bonilla, P. López Ronda, G. Marín Raigal, E. Armero, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ffauf SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg)
   
      Details of the proceedings before OHIM
   
   
      Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant
   
      Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘ZARA’ — Community trade mark registration No 732 958
   
      Procedure before OHIM: Revocation proceedings
   
      Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 June 2015 in Case R 867/2014-2
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the contested decision, in particular regarding the revocation of the CTM registration No 732958 ‘ZARA’ for the challenged goods in classes 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order OHIM to pay the costs, including the costs those incurred in the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the Second Board of Appeal of the OHIM.
            
         
      Pleas in law
   
   
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Articles 42(2), 51(1)(a), 52(2) and 85(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Infringement of Rules 22(3) and 22(4) of Regulation No 2868/95.