Peek & Cloppenburg V OHIM — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek & Cloppenburg)

    View Author April 2013

    Actions for annulment brought by the applicant for the word marks PEEK & CLOPPENBURG for goods in class 25 and services in class 35.

    In Cases T-506/11 and T-507/11, Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf) v Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM), the General Court has dismissed the appeals from two decisions of the Board of Appeal of OHIM in opposition proceedings brought by Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg) against Community trade mark applications by Peek & Cloppenburg (Düsseldorf) for the word marks PEEK & CLOPPENBURG, applied for on 13 March 2000 in class 25 and on 24 October 2000 in class 35. Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg) had based both oppositions on Article 8(4) Community Trade Mark Regulation (CTMR) in conjunction with Articles 5(2), 6(3), 15(2) and (3) of the German Act on the Protection of Trade Marks and other Symbols (thereafter referred to as “MarkenG”) claiming that they had used the company name PEEK & CLOPPENBURG since 1911 for department stores in relation to clothing, footwear and headgear in Germany. The Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal of OHIM had upheld both oppositions.

    *This article first appeared on WTR Daily, part of World Trademark Review, in May 2013. For further information, please go to