Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2022:844
Date: 2022-12-21
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Second Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for annulment - successful

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 – Sanrio v EUIPO – Miroglio Fashion (SANRIO CHARACTERS) (Case T-43/22) 1 (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark SANRIO CHARACTERS – Earlier EU word mark CARACTÈRE – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)) Language of the case: English Parties Applicant: Sanrio Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: V. Schmitz-Fohrmann, lawyer) Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: R. Raponi and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents) Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Miroglio Fashion Srl (Alba, Italy) Re: By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 November 2021 (Case R 2460/2020-2). Operative part of the judgment The Court: Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 16 November 2021 (Case R 2460/2020-2) in so far as it concerns: ‘wholesaling and retailing and mail order sales services relating to the sale of bags, purses and wallets; wholesaling and retailing and mail order services relating to the sale of articles of footwear and headgear; wholesaling and retailing and mail order services relating to the sale of sporting articles’, in Class 35 of the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended; ‘life-saving apparatus and equipment; protection devices for personal use against accidents; divers’ masks; goggles for sports; protective helmets for sports; protective masks; ear plugs for divers; ear plugs for swimming’ in Class 9; Dismisses the action as to the remainder; Orders Sanrio Co. Ltd and EUIPO to bear their own costs. ____________ 1 OJ C 119, 14.3.2022.