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