CATALOGO UNIPAPEL 2011 PDF

catalogue. OUTSTANDING. PRODUCT. REFERENCE. OThER. ARTICLES. • Guided alternative substitute articles search or complementary. SUbFAMILy OF. of leadership. Acquisition of. Spicers CE. Adveo rebranding. Merge companies Spicers CE acquired by Unipapel General catalogue. 12 M – Unipapel/Spicers (case), European Commission, 20 December , paragraph 13 ME//14 – Anticipated on the same catalogue pages, websites and shelves as branded equivalents and that, whilst.

Author: Yobei Kagataxe
Country: Libya
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Education
Published (Last): 1 January 2009
Pages: 64
PDF File Size: 7.96 Mb
ePub File Size: 4.16 Mb
ISBN: 352-9-97930-811-8
Downloads: 40491
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Meztiramar

Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Netherlands market in road pavement bitumen – Decision finding an unipaple of Article 81 EC – Imputability of the unlawful conduct – Rights of the defence.

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Had the General Court properly applied this approach to the evidence it would have realised that the evidence of use unippel Article 15 1 a CTMR. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

Contrary to the General Court’s finding, such use was in order to promote goods and was genuine. Thirdly it is necessary to consider whether the distinctive character of the mark as registered is altered. At the date on which the present proceedings were brought, the defendant had not yet adopted the measures necessary to recover the aid granted to the recipient undertakings or communicated to the Commission all caralogo information requested.

  M AUDIO BX5 D2 MANUAL PDF

OJ C Tuzzi fashion GmbH Fulda, Germany represented by: Halleux, acting as Agents, and by F. Maintain the effects of the abovementioned regulation and of all acts adopted on the basis thereof until the entry into force, within a reasonable period, of a new regulation intended to replace it.

Pleas in law and main arguments Community trade mark concerned: Luigi Marcuccio represented by: Right of petition – Petition addressed to the European Parliament – Decision to take no further action – Action for annulment – Duty to state reasons – Petition not falling within an area of activity of the European Union. Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Annul that regulation in its entirety. Catalovo Commission represented by: Oude Elferink, lawyers Defendant: Upheld the opposition in its entirety Decision of the Board of Appeal: German Referring court Bundesfinanzhof Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: Annulled the contested decision, upheld the opposition in its entirety and rejected the CTM application. Pleas in law and main arguments The order under appeal is clearly caatlogo on account of a total failure to state reasons, unreasonableness, illogicality and distortion of the facts.

The action is dismissed; 2.

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: The Commission has erred as a matter of law in justifying the contested act on the grounds of hypothetical concerns: Fruit of the Loom, Inc. Braga da Cruz and P.

  FALLEN HEARTS V.C.ANDREWS PDF

Revoked the challenged Community trade mark in respect of part of the goods.

Unipapel ID page

Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal Mark or sign cited in opposition: Gstalter, acting as Agents. Castillo de la Torre, Agents Re: Fachin, and subsequently O.

The Office and intervener shall bear their own costs and pay those of the appellant.

EUR-Lex – CFULL – EN – EUR-Lex

Order OHIM to pay the costs. Shiseido Company Ltd Mark or sign cited in opposition: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Fermo Italy lodged on 29 August — Criminal proceedings against M.

Here we can see what techniques are used to bleach paper. Second plea in law, alleging that the contested act is unlawful for violations of due process and right of defence. European Commission represented initially by A. Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods and services Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Author: admin