Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62014TN0334

Case T-334/14: Action brought on 14 May 2014  — Roca Sanitario v OHIM — Villeroy & Boch (Taps)

OJ C 261, 11.8.2014, p. 26–27 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

11.8.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/26

Action brought on 14 May 2014 — Roca Sanitario v OHIM — Villeroy & Boch (Taps)

(Case T-334/14)

2014/C 261/49

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Roca Sanitario, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: R. Guerras Mazón, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Villeroy & Boch AG (Mettlach, Germany)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 21 February 2014, in Case R 812/2012-3;

—

make an order for costs against OHIM and, as the case may be, the intervener if the latter enters an appearance and contests the action.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community design in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Design of a tap — Community design registration number No 1 264 568-0004

Proprietor of the Community design: Applicant

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community design: Villeroy & Boch AG

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Lack of novelty and of individual character compared with its own design for a tap (No 00 584 560-0004)

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Application for a declaration of invalidity upheld

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 6 of Regulation No 6/2002 in conjunction with Article 25(1)(b) of the same regulation.

Top