Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12March 2014— Borrajo Canelo v OHIM— Tecnoazúcar (PALMA MULATA)
(Case T‑381/12)
Community trade mark— Proceedings for revocation— Community word mark PALMA MULATA— Genuine use— Article15(1)(a) and Article51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No207/2009— Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctiveness
1.Community trade mark— Surrender, revocation and invalidity— Causes of revocation— No genuine use of a trade mark— Use of the mark in a form differing by elements not altering the distinctive character of the mark— Subject matter and scope of Article15(1)(a) of Regulation No207/2009 (Council Regulation No207/2009, Arts 15(1)(a), and 51(1)(a)) (see paras 25, 26)
2.Community trade mark— Surrender, revocation and invalidity— Causes of revocation— No genuine use of a trade mark— Use of the mark in a form differing by elements not altering the distinctive character of the mark— Word mark PALMA MULATA (Council Regulation No207/2009, Arts15(1)(a), and 51(1)(a)) (see paras 31-40)
3.Community trade mark— Decisions of the Office— Legality— OHIM’s previous decision-making practice— Principle of non-discrimination— Irrelevant (Council Regulation No207/2009) (see para. 43)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 21May 2012 (Case R 2265/2010-2) concerning proceedings for revocation between Ana Borrajo Canelo, Carlos Borrajo Canelo and Luis Borrajo Canelo, of the one part, and Tecnoazúcar, of the other. |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
| Dismisses the action; |
2. |
| Orders Ms Ana Borrajo Canelo, Mr Carlos Borrajo Canelo and Mr Luis Borrajo Canelo to pay the costs. |