This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017TA0138
Case T-138/17: Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2019 — Prim v EUIPO — Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik (PRIMED) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark PRIMED — Earlier national figurative marks PRIM S.A., PRiM, S.A. SUMINISTROS MEDICOS and GRUPO PRiM — Genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Second sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Submission of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Discretion of the Board of Appeal — Classification as new or additional evidence — Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))
Case T-138/17: Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2019 — Prim v EUIPO — Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik (PRIMED) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark PRIMED — Earlier national figurative marks PRIM S.A., PRiM, S.A. SUMINISTROS MEDICOS and GRUPO PRiM — Genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Second sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Submission of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Discretion of the Board of Appeal — Classification as new or additional evidence — Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))
Case T-138/17: Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2019 — Prim v EUIPO — Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik (PRIMED) (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark PRIMED — Earlier national figurative marks PRIM S.A., PRiM, S.A. SUMINISTROS MEDICOS and GRUPO PRiM — Genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Right to be heard — Second sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Submission of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal — Discretion of the Board of Appeal — Classification as new or additional evidence — Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))
OJ C 155, 6.5.2019, p. 39–40
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
6.5.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 155/39 |
Judgment of the General Court of 20 March 2019 — Prim v EUIPO — Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik (PRIMED)
(Case T-138/17) (1)
(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark PRIMED - Earlier national figurative marks PRIM S.A., PRiM, S.A. SUMINISTROS MEDICOS and GRUPO PRiM - Genuine use of the earlier marks - Article 57(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Second sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now second sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Submission of evidence for the first time before the Board of Appeal - Discretion of the Board of Appeal - Classification as new or additional evidence - Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))
(2019/C 155/46)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Prim, SA (Móstoles, Spain) (represented by: L. Broschat García, lawyer)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Lukošiūtė, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik GmbH (Halberstadt, Germany) (represented by: D. Donath, lawyer)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 December 2016 (Joined Cases R 2494/2015-4 and R 163/2016-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Prim and Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 19 December 2016 (Joined Cases R 2494/2015-4 and R 163/2016-4); |
|
2. |
Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
|
3. |
Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay half of those incurred by Prim, SA; |
|
4. |
Orders Primed Halberstadt Medizintechnik GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay half of those ińcurred by Prim. |