Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2021:209
Date: 2021-04-21
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 21 April 2021 – Robert Klingel v EUIPO (MEN+) (Case T‑345/20) (EU trade mark – Application for registration of the EU figurative mark MEN+ – Absolute ground for refusal – Lack of distinctiveness – Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Examination of the facts – Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Obligation to state reasons) 1. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Mark devoid of distinctive character – Definition (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see para. 14) 2. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Assessment of distinctive character – Criteria (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see para. 15) 3. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Marks consisting of advertising slogans – Distinctive character – Application of specific criteria for assessment – Not permissible (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see para. 16) 4. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Marks consisting of advertising slogans – Laudatory promotional formula (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see para. 17) 5. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Figurative mark MEN+ (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 30, 32-34, 45, 50, 56, 58) 6. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Separate examination of the grounds for refusal in relation to each of the goods or services covered by the application for registration – Obligation to state the reasons for refusing to register – Scope (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 7(1) and 94(1), first sentence) (see para. 60) 7. EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of the EUIPO’s own motion – Duty of diligence (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 7 and 95(1)) (see paras 74, 75) 8. EU trade mark – Decisions of the Office – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001) (see para. 78) Re: Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 March 2020 (Case R 1906/2019-1) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign MEN+ as an EU trade mark. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Robert Klingel OHG to pay the costs.