Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2025:940
Date: 2025-10-08
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Second Chamber
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Bulgaria

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 8 October 2025 – Capella v EUIPO – Richemont International (COLORATURA) (Case T‑562/24) ( EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark COLORATURA – Earlier national word mark COLORATURA – Priority claim – Concept of ‘first application’ – Article 34(1) and (4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Legal certainty – Reasonable time ) 1. 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, second para., TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence) (see paragraphs 17, 21) 2. EU trade mark – Proceedings before the adjudicating bodies of EUIPO – Obligation of EUIPO, including the Boards of Appeal, to adopt decisions within a reasonable time (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(1); European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001) (see paragraphs 25-27) 3. EU trade mark – Lodging of application for EU trade mark – Right of priority – Trade mark application accompanied by a claim for priority – Examination of the formal and substantive conditions by EUIPO – Priority date entered on the register – Effect (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8 and 34 to 36) (see paragraphs 36, 56-60) 4. International agreements – Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property – Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of International Property Rights (TRIPs) – Direct effect – None – Interpretation consistent with EU law – Limits (TRIPs Agreement, Art. 2(1); European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001) (see paragraphs 47, 48, 50) 5. EU trade mark – Lodging of application for EU trade mark – Right of priority – Impossibility for an operator to rely directly on the Paris Convention (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 34) (see paragraph 49) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Capella EOOD to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Richemont International SA; 3. Declares that the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) is to bear its own costs.