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

Текст

... (1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

In Case T‑172/23,

Dendiki BV, established in Roosendaal (Netherlands), represented by N. Ruyters and A. Klomp, lawyers,

applicant,

v

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by D. Gája, acting as Agent,

defendant,

the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being

D-Market Elektronik Hizmetler ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi, established in Istanbul (Türkiye), represented by I. Robledo McClymont and M. Hernández Gázquez, lawyers,

THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber),

composed of M.J. Costeira, President, U. Öberg and E. Tichy-Fisslberger (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, Dendiki BV, seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 January 2023 (Case R 639/2021-4) (‘the contested decision’).

Background to the dispute

2. On 6 November 2019, the intervener, D-Market Elektronik Hizmetler ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi, filed with EUIPO an application for a declaration of ...