31.8.2013
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 252/23
Appeal brought on 1 July 2013 by Metropolis Inmobiliarias y Restauraciones, SL against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 25 April 2013 in Case T-284/11: Metropolis Inmobiliarias y Restauraciones, SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
(Case C-374/13 P)
2013/C 252/38
Language of the case: English
Parties
Appellant: Metropolis Inmobiliarias y Restauraciones, SL (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, abogado)
Otherparties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG
Form of order sought
The appellant claims that the Court should:
—
Set aside the decision of the General Court of 25 April 2013 in case T-284/11, granting in consequence the registration of the Community Trademark Application no7 112 113‘METROINVEST’ to distinguish services in class 36.
—
Order the other parties to bear the costs of the procedure.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The Appellant raises a single plea alleging the:
—
Infringement of the Art. 8.1 b) of Regulation no 207/2009 (1)
However this plea consists of four parts, which are the following:
—
Error on the part of the General Court and on the part of OHIM in assessing the comparison of the signs.
—
The General Court has not taken into account the applicable case law regarding the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion.
—
Lack of coherence with other Office resolutions in which the same parts, and related trademarks are involved.
—
Pacific coexistence between other trademarks, which include the word METRO in different classes, and also in class 36.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark
OJ L 78, p. 1
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy