header-logo header-logo

EU

16 December 2016
Issue: 7727 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Groupe Go Sport v European Union Intellectual Property Office T-703/15 , [2016] All ER (D) 32 (Dec)

The General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Groupe Go Sport (GGS) against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) relating to opposition proceedings between Design Go and GGS, concerning the application by the latter for registration of a word sign ‘GO SPORT’ as an EU trade mark. The General Court upheld the decision that GGS had failed to comply with art 60 of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 which required that a notice of appeal had to be filed in writing with EUIPO within two months of the date of notification of the decision and that a written statement setting out the grounds of appeal had to be filed within four months of the date of notification of the decision at issue.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll