Judgment;Information — ECLI:EU:T:2020:427
Date: 2020-09-23
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Third Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 23 September 2020 – Brillux v EUIPO – Synthesa Chemie (Freude an Farbe) (Case T‑401/19) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Figurative mark Freude an Farbe in yellow, orange, red, pink, violet, blue, turquoise, dark green, light green and charcoal – Earlier figurative EU trade mark Glemadur Freude an Farbe – Relative grounds for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now 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 – Figurative mark Freude an Farbe in yellow, orange, red, pink, violet, blue, turquoise, dark green, light green and charcoal and Glemadur Freude an Farbe (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 27-31, 46, 51, 52, 60-67, 71) 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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 34-36) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 March 2019 (Case R 1498/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Synthesa Chemie and Brillux. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Brillux GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.