62022TJ0459_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 3 May 2023 –Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO – Biolark (BIOLARK)
(Case T‑459/22) (
1
)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Figurative mark BIOLARK – Earlier national word mark BIOPLAK – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
1.
Action for annulment – Interest in bringing proceedings – Meaning – Action capable of securing a benefit for the applicant – Interest having to subsist until the delivery of the court decision – Contested measure lapsing in the course of the proceedings – Interest in bringing proceedings retained
(Art. 263 TFEU)
(see paragraph 16)
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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment – Distinctiveness or reputation of the earlier mark
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 26, 27, 95, 96)
3.
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 between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraph 29)
4.
EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Legality – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)
(see paragraph 40)
5.
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
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 42, 45, 46, 72, 87)
6.
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 BIOLARK
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 57, 67, 85, 86, 90, 100-102)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Refuses the application for a declaration that there is no need to adjudicate made by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);
2.
Dismisses the action;
3.
Orders each party to bear its own costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 340, 5.9.2022.