EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014TN0420
Case T-420/14: Action brought on 11 June 2014 — Wine in Black v OHIM — Quinta do Noval — Vinhos (Wine in Black)
Case T-420/14: Action brought on 11 June 2014 — Wine in Black v OHIM — Quinta do Noval — Vinhos (Wine in Black)
Case T-420/14: Action brought on 11 June 2014 — Wine in Black v OHIM — Quinta do Noval — Vinhos (Wine in Black)
OJ C 303, 8.9.2014, p. 33–33
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
8.9.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 303/33 |
Action brought on 11 June 2014 — Wine in Black v OHIM — Quinta do Noval — Vinhos (Wine in Black)
(Case T-420/14)
2014/C 303/41
Language in which the application was lodged: English
Parties
Applicant: Wine in Black GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Bauer and V. Ahmann, lawyers)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Quinta do Noval — Vinhos, SA (Pinhão, Portugal)
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
|
— |
Fully set aside the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 March 2014 in Case R 1601/2013-1; |
|
— |
Award the costs of the proceedings against the defendant and the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant
Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Wine in Black’ for goods and services in classes 33, 35 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 1 0 9 49 071
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Quinta do Noval — Vinhos, SA
Mark or sign cited in opposition: The word mark ‘NOVAL BLACK’ for goods in class 33
Decision of the Opposition Division: The opposition was upheld
Decision of the Board of Appeal: The appeal was dismissed
Pleas in law: Violation of Art. 8 (1) (b) of Regulation No 207/2009