Information;Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2025:207
Date: 2025-03-05
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Seventh Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Finland

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2025 – Enedo v EUIPO – Enedis (Enedo RESHAPING ELECTRICITY)) (Case T‑1144/23) (1) ( EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark Enedo RESHAPING ELECTRICITY – Earlier EU word mark ENEDIS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Restriction of the goods and services covered in the trade mark application ) 1. EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Limitation of the list of goods and services after the decision of the Board of Appeal – Consequences (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 188; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 49(1)) (see paragraphs 22, 23) 2. 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 29, 30, 104, 105) 3. 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 – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Level of attention of the public (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraph 31) 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 – Figurative mark Enedo RESHAPING ELECTRICITY and word mark ENEDIS (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 37, 43, 69, 83, 91, 97-99, 103, 111) 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 – Refusal to register where there is a relative ground for refusal, even if limited to part of the Union (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraph 38) 6. 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 – Similarity between the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of a trade mark (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 45, 46, 66, 81) 7. EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of good administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001) (see paragraph 64) Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Enedo Oyj to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Enedis; 3. Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs. 1 OJ C 1107, 5.2.2024.