Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2023:212
Date: 2023-04-26
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for annulment - inadmissible

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 26 April 2023 – Kaminski v EUIPO – Polfarmex (SYRENA) (Case T‑35/22) (1) (EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark SYRENA – Application of the law ratione temporis – Partial inadmissibility of the action – Res judicata – Article 15(1) and Article 51(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 18(1) and Article 58(1)(a) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Genuine use in the European Union – Obligation to state reasons – First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001) 1. Acts of the institutions – Temporal application – Procedural rules – Substantive rules – Rules of jurisdiction – Distinction (see paragraph 23) 2. EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU – Essential procedural requirement (Art. 296 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(2); European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence) (see paragraphs 43, 45) 3. EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Grounds for revocation – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Proof of use – Genuine use – Definition – Criteria for assessment – Requirement of solid and objective evidence (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 51(1)(a) and (2)) (see paragraphs 48-51) 4. EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Grounds for revocation – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Word mark SYRENA (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 51(1)(a) and (2)) (see paragraphs 57, 65, 67) 5. EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Grounds for revocation – Lack of genuine use of the mark – Concept of ‘proper reasons’ for non-use – Independent and uniform interpretation – Obstacles bearing a direct relation to the trade mark rendering its use unreasonable or impossible and independent of the volition of the trade mark proprietor (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 51(1)(a) and (2)) (see paragraphs 61, 62, 67) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Mr Arkadiusz Kaminski to pay the costs. 1 OJ C 119, 14.3.2022.