Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 9 July 2025 – AirPlus International v EUIPO – Alpian (+a)
(Case T‑407/24)
( EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – EU figurative mark +a – Earlier EU figurative mark A+ – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Well-known facts – Refusal of the request for oral proceedings before the Board of Appeal – Article 96(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 )
1.      EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Opposition proceedings – Examination restricted to the facts, evidence and arguments provided – Examination of a legal question of EUIPO’s own motion – Condition
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(1))
(see paragraph 21)
2.      EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Opposition proceedings – Examination restricted to the facts, evidence and arguments provided – Well-known facts taken into account
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(1))
(see paragraphs 22, 27)
3.      EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Opposition proceedings – Assessment of the similarity of the goods or services in question and of the signs at issue
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(1))
(see paragraph 23)
4.      EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Scope – No obligation to prove matters within common knowledge – Dispute before the General Court
(Art. 256 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(1))
(see paragraph 29)
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 – Criteria for assessment – Distinctiveness or reputation of the earlier mark
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 35, 36, 59-63, 68)
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
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 37, 38, 51, 57)
7.      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 goods or services concerned – Criteria for assessment
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 44, 45)
8.      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 marks +a and A+
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 46, 47, 50, 52, 58, 64, 70, 71)
9.      EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Recourse to the oral procedure – Discretion of EUIPO
(see paragraph 74)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders AirPlus International GmbH to pay the costs.