Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2023:397
Date: 2023-07-12
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Spain

Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 12 July 2023 – Nurel v EUIPO – FKuR Property (Terylene) (Case T‑325/22) (1) (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark Terylene – Earlier EU word mark TERRALENE – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Proof of genuine use) 1. EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Facts and evidence not submitted in due time – Account taken – Discretion of EUIPO (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(2); Commission Regulation 2018/625, Art. 27(4)) (see paragraphs 19-22, 24, 30) 2. 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 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001 (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3)) (see paragraph 41) 3. 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 (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 18(1)) (see paragraphs 42-45) 4. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 64-66) 5. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark Terylene (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 18(1) and 58(1)(a)) (see paragraphs 71-74) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Nurel, SA to pay the costs. 1 OJ C 284, 25.7.2022.