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 - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark CLEOPATRA - Earlier EU word mark CLEOPATRA - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 )
Afaaq Ahmad Qozgar, residing in Thiruvananthapuram (India), represented by L. Pivec, lawyer,
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by E. Markakis and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being
L’Oréal, established in Paris (France), represented by T. de Haan and S. Vandezande, lawyers,
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.