62021TJ0599_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 5 October 2022 –bett1.de v EUIPO – XXXLutz Marken (Body-Star)
(Case T‑599/21) (
1
)
(EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark Body-Star – Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard – Relative ground for refusal – Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, read in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of that regulation)
1.
EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for 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 14, 15, 41, 42)
2.
EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 16, 17)
3.
EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word marks Body-Star and Bodyguard
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 22-24, 28-30, 39, 40, 43, 48-51)
4.
EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier 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 25)
5.
EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Existence of an identical or similar earlier 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 paragraph 31)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 July 2021 (Case R 1712/2020-2) as regards ‘mattresses; mattress toppers; beds; bed frames; slatted bases for beds; bedding, except linen; cushions; pillows; neck-supporting pillows; waterbeds, not for medical purposes; air mattresses’ in Class 20 and ‘bed throws; bed linen and blankets; ticks [mattress covers]; mattress covers; ticks (mattress and pillow coverings); sleeping bags’ in Class 24;
2.
Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.
Orders each party to bear its own costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 452, 8.11.2021.