Language of document :

Action brought on 22 September 2015 — Guiral Broto v OHIM — Gastro & Soul (Cafe Del Sol)

(Case T-549/15)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Ramón Guiral Broto (Marbella, Spain) (represented by: J. de Castro Hermida, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Gastro & Soul GmbH (Hildesheim, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘CAFE DEL SOL’ — Application for registration No 6 104 608

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 July 2015 in Case R 1888/2014-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Annul the contested decision and allow the opposition based on the earlier mark held by Ramón Guiral Broto, Spanish mark No 2348110, in Class 42 of the International Classification.

Rule that the opposition is upheld, confirming the decision of the Opposition Division refusing the application for the Community trade mark No 006104608 CAFE DEL SOL in respect of ‘provision of food and drink, temporary accommodation and catering’, in Class 43 of the International Classification, requested by the German commercial company Gastro & Soul GmbH, or if the Court should not have jurisdiction in that respect, to refer the matter back to a Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market, with the direction to uphold the opposition.

In respect of the evidence, in addition to the evidence in the administrative proceedings, the documents accompanying the present application be held to have been produced, that is documents numbers 1 to 4, as specified in the list of documents annexed to the application.

Plea in law

The pleas and main arguments are those relied on in Case T-548/15.

____________