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.
( Appeal - EU trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 4 - Signs of which an EU trade mark may consist - Application for registration of a tactile position mark representing a cylindrical sanitary insert - Article 7 - Absolute grounds for refusal - Obligation to examine at the outset the ground for refusal laid down in Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 - None - Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Article 72(3) - Power of the General Court to alter the decision of the Board of Appeal - Limits )
APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 17 February 2023,
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by D. Hanf, T. Klee and E. Markakis, acting as Agents,
Neoperl AG, established in Reinach (Switzerland), represented by C. Mertzlufft‑Paufler, M. Nielen and C. Schrempp, Rechtsanwälte,
composed of K. Lenaerts, President of the Court, acting as President of the Fifth Chamber, I. Jarukaitis, President of the Fourth Chamber, E. Regan, Z. Csehi and O. Spineanu-Matei (Rapporteur), 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.