Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2021:543
Date: 2021-09-08
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - successful
Origin: France

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 September 2021 – SBG v EUIPO – VF International (GEØGRAPHICAL NØRWAY) (Case T‑458/20) (EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Word mark GEØGRAPHICAL NØRWAY – Absolute ground for refusal – Absolute ground for invalidity – Article 51(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Bad faith – Obligation to state reasons) 1. EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Applicant in bad faith when lodging the trade mark application – Criteria for assessment – Taking into account of all relevant factors at the time of filing the application for registration – Applicant’s knowledge that a third party is using an identical or similar sign – Intention of the applicant (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 8(2) and (4) and 51(1)(b)) (see paras 16, 17, 77) 2. EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Applicant in bad faith when lodging the trade mark application – Concept of bad faith – Scope (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 51(1)(b)) (see paras 18, 19) 3. EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Applicant in bad faith when lodging the trade mark application – Criteria for assessment – Need to prove the existence of the likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue – Precluded (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 8(1)(a) and (b), (2) and (5), 51(1)(b) and 52(1)(a)) (see paras 20-22) 4. 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 (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence) (see paras 24, 89, 90) 5. Action for annulment – Pleas in law – Infringement of essential procedural requirements – Lack of or inadequate statement of reasons – To be considered of the Court’s own motion (Arts 263 and 296 TFEU) (see para. 25) Re: Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 April 2020 (Case R 1178/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between VF International and SBG. Operative part The Court: 1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 6 April 2020 (Case R 1178/2019-1); 2. Orders EUIPO and VF International Sagl to pay the costs.