Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2021:567
Date: 2021-09-15
Language of the case: Spanish
Court formation: Second Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Spain

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 15 September 2021 – Freshly Cosmetics v EUIPO – Misiego Blázquez (IDENTY BEAUTY) (Case T‑688/20) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark IDENTY BEAUTY – Earlier national figurative mark IDENTITY THE IMAGE CLUB – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) 1. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19, 20, 75, 76) 2. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public – Cosmetic, beauty or personal care and personal hygiene products (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 21, 24) 3. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Complementary nature of the goods or services (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 25, 26) 4. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative marks IDENTY BEAUTY and IDENTITY THE IMAGE CLUB (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31-33, 35, 36, 79-83) 5. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 41, 42, 56) 6. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Coexistence of earlier marks – Recognition of a certain degree of distinctiveness of a national mark (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 62, 63) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 September 2020 (Case R 205/2020-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Misiego Blázquez and Freshly Cosmetics. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Freshly Cosmetics, SL to pay the costs.