Hochmann Marketing v EUIPO (Procedure of the Court of Justice - Appeal - Absence of previously unknown facts - Order) [2020] EUECJ C-118/18P-REVII_CO (16 January 2020)

Hochmann Marketing v EUIPO (Procedure of the Court of Justice - Appeal - Absence of previously unknown facts - Order) [2020] EUECJ C-118/18P-REVII_CO (16 January 2020)

The application for revision is inadmissible because the fact relied upon (EUIPO decision of 12 March 2019) postdates the order under appeal and therefore cannot constitute a previously unknown fact within the meaning of Article 159(1) of the Rules of Procedure.

Citation
[2020] EUECJ C-118/18P-REVII_CO
Parties
Applicant for Revision: Hochmann Marketing GmbH; Defendant at First Instance: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO); Intervener at First Instance: Rainberry Inc.
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Revision of Court Order (eu Trade Mark) / Order on Admissibility of Revision Application
Outcome
Application for revision dismissed as inadmissible
Legal Topics
EU Trade Mark Revocation, Revision of Court Orders, Genuine Use of Trade Mark, Conversion to National Trade Mark, Admissibility of Revision Applications
Intellectual Property Law European Union Law Civil Procedure EU Trade Mark Revocation Revision of Court Orders Genuine Use of Trade Mark Conversion to National Trade Mark Admissibility of Revision Applications

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hochmann Marketing GmbH

Applicant for Revision

European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant at First Instance

Rainberry Inc.

Intervener at First Instance

Procedural Posture

Application for Revision of Court Order (eu Trade Mark) / Order on Admissibility of Revision Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a post-judgment EUIPO decision constitutes a previously unknown fact justifying revision under Article 159 of the Rules of Procedure
  2. 2 Whether the application for revision is admissible under Article 159(1) of the Rules of Procedure

Ratio Decidendi

The application for revision is inadmissible because the fact relied upon (EUIPO decision of 12 March 2019) postdates the order under appeal and therefore cannot constitute a previously unknown fact within the meaning of Article 159(1) of the Rules of Procedure.

Court Disposition

Application for revision dismissed as inadmissible

Orders

  • The application for revision brought by Hochmann Marketing GmbH is dismissed.
  • Hochmann Marketing is to pay the costs.