Дело T-***/**: *****************, Съдебно решение от **.**.2024 г.

Текст

... distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Article 95(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Article 27(4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 – Obligation to state reasons – Right to be heard – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 )

In Case T‑1132/23,

Olvi Oyj, established in Iisalmi (Finland), represented by K. Rantala, lawyer,

applicant,

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by T. Klee, acting as Agent,

defendant,

the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO being

Koninklijke De Kuyper BV, established in Schiedam (Netherlands),

THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber),

composed of: J. Costeira, President, U. Öberg and P. Zilgalvis (Rapporteur), Judges,

Registrar: V. Di Bucci,

having regard to the written part of the procedure,

having regard to the fact that no request for a hearing was submitted by the parties within three weeks after service of notification of the close of the written part of the procedure, and having decided to rule on the action without an oral part of the procedure, pursuant to Article 106(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court,

gives the following

Judgment

1. By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant, Olvi Oyj, seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of ...