Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(EU trade mark — Application for EU figurative mark fluo. — Partial rejection of the application for registration — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptiveness — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
M & T Emporia Ilektrikon-Ilektronikon Eidon AE, established in Thessaloniki (Greece), represented by A. Spyridonos, lawyer,
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by M.d.M. Baldares and J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agents,
ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2016 (Case R 863/2016-2), relating to the application for registration of the figurative sign fluo. as a European Union trade mark,
composed of V. Tomljenović, President, E. Bieliūnas (Rapporteur) and A. Kornezov, Judges,
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.