Big news - the CFI has actually overturned an OHIM decision. Bad news - the CFI's judgment isn't available in English.The IPKat (left) is unimpressed by the lack of translation
The case concerns a clash between YUKI and YUPI in Classes 3 and 5. Plugging the operative part into Babel Fish gives the following:
(1) the decision of the first appeal court of the Office of the harmonization in the domestic market (marks, drawings and models) (OHMI) of April 23, 2004 (joined businesses R 547/2003-1 and R 604/2003-1) is cancelled in what it did right to the recourse of the speaker with regard to the "soaps; products of perfumery, oils essential, cosmetic, lotions for the hair; toothpastes ", concerned with class 3, and the" hygienic products ", concerned with class 5, aimed by the Community request for mark.
(2) the OHMI will support its own costs as well as half of the costs
exposed by Jabones Pardo, SA.
(3) Quimi Romar, SL will support its own costs.
All enlightenment from linguistically adept readers will be welcome.
CFI DECISION IS YUKI
![CFI DECISION IS YUKI]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html