Ineos Healthcare Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, other party) – WLR Daily

Ineos Healthcare Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, other party) (Case T-222/09); [2011] WLR (D) 53

“In opposition proceedings against registration of a trade mark pursuant to article 42 of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94, the opposing party was not obliged to adduce evidence in support of the opposition. Whilst in relation to proceedings relating to relative grounds for refusal the Board of Appeal of the Office of Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) could take into account facts which were likely to be known by anyone or which might be learned from generally accessible sources, it was not, however, entitled to exceed the conditions governing examination set out in article 74 of Regulation 40/94.”

WLR Daily, 23rd February 2011

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

0 Responses to “Ineos Healthcare Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd, other party) – WLR Daily”



  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




February 2011
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Mar »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28  

Categories


%d bloggers like this: