Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2018:221
Date: 2018-04-25
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Seventh Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Luxembourg

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 April 2018 – Walfood v EUIPO — Romanov Holding (CHATKA) (Case T‑312/16) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark CHATKA — Earlier international figurative mark CHATKA — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Genuine use of the earlier mark — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001)) 1. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Meaning (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2)) (see para. 34) 2. EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Examination of the application — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Use by a third party with the consent of the trade mark proprietor — Express or implied consent (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(2) and 17(6)) (see paras 47-49) 3. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Probative value of the evidence — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2)) (see para. 50) 4. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Meaning — Interpretation taking account of the rationale of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Recital 10 and Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, rule 22(3)) (see para. 93) 5. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Meaning — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Recital 10 and Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, rule 22(3)) (see paras 94-99) 6. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Use of the mark in a form differing by elements not altering the distinctive character of the mark — Word mark CHATKA and figurative mark CHATKA (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2)) (see paras 124, 128, 131, 141, 142, 152) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 March 2016 (Case R 2870/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Romanov Holding and Walfood. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Walfood SA to pay the costs.