Omnilex Logo
Legal research
Legal research
Corpus
Corpus

Wondering how this text applies to your situation?

Free consultation, no commitment

Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.

Are you a lawyer?

Discover Omnilex, your workspace for faster legal research.

Already trusted by over 6,000 lawyers.

Try Omnilex
Settings
Settings
Court decisions

ECLI:EU:C:2011:727•Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 November 2011.#LG Electronics, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).#Appeal - Community trade mark - Word sign 'KOMPRESSOR PLUS' - Refusal to register - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(c) - Descriptive character - Consideration of new evidence by the General Court - Distortion of the facts and evidence.#Case C-88/11 P.

Open source

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 November 2011.#LG Electronics, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).#Appeal - Community trade mark - Word sign 'KOMPRESSOR PLUS' - Refusal to register - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(1)(c) - Descriptive character - Consideration of new evidence by the General Court - Distortion of the facts and evidence.#Case C-88/11 P.

ECLI:EU:C:2011:727Eu Chamb 07 CNov 10, 2011

Open source

Full text

Subject of the case
Operative part

Subject of the case

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 16 December 2010 in Case T-497/09 LG Electronics v OHIM dismissing the appellant’s action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 September 2009 (Case R 397/2009-1) concerning an application for registration of the word sign KOMPRESSOR PLUS as a Community trade mark – Descriptive nature of the mark – Article 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) – Consideration of new facts by the General Court – Distortion of the evidence.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal;

2. Orders LG Electronics Inc. to pay the costs.

Wondering how this text applies to your situation?

Free consultation, no commitment

Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.